I  j  • 


THE   HISTORY 


OF 


MASON  AND  DIXON'S  LINE; 


CONTAINED    IN 


AN      ADDRESS, 


DELIVERED    BY 


JOHN   H.  B.  LATKOBE, 

OF     MARYLAND, 


BEFORE 


THE  HISTORICAL  SOCIETY  OF  PENNSYLVANIA, 


November    8,    1854. 


PHILADELPHIA: 

LIPPINCOTT,  GKAMBO,  AND   CO. 

1855. 


PHILADELPHIA: 

T.    K.    AND    P.    O.    COLLINS,    PRINTERS, 


CORRESPONDENCE. 


PHILADELPHIA,  November  16,  1854. 
DEAR  SIR  : — 

At  a  meeting  of  the  Historical  Society  of  Pennsylvania, 
held  on  the  13th  instant,  the  following  resolution  was  unanimously 
adopted : — 

Resolved,  That  the  thanks  of  this  Society  be  presented  to  John 
H.  B,  Latrobe,  Esq.,  for  his  very  able  and  instructive  Anniversary 
Address,  delivered  on  the  8th  instant ;  and  that  he  be  requested 
to  furnish  a  copy  for  publication. 

The  undersigned  were  appointed  a  committee  to  carry  this 
resolution  into  effect;  and  we  concur  in  the  hope  that  you  will 
comply  with  the  wish  of  the  Society  to  render  your  interesting 
discourse  permanently  and  generally  accessible  to  our  fellow- 
citizens. 

We  are,  very  respectfully, 

Your  obedient  servants, 

JOB  R.  TYSON, 

WM.  PARKER  FOULKE, 

W.  B.  REED, 

A.  L.  ELWYN, 

J.  FRANCIS  FISHER. 

To  JOHN  H.  B.  LATROBE,  ESQ. 
BALTIMORE. 


IV  CORRESPONDENCE. 


BALTIMORE,  November  29,  1854. 
GENTLEMEN  : — 

I  have  your  letter  of  the  16th  instant,  asking  for  a  copy  of 
my  address  delivered  before  the  Historical  Society  of  Pennsylvania 
on  the  8th  instant.  I  inclose  it ;  and  take  the  occasion  to  thank 
you  for  the  kindness  of  the  terms  in  which  the  request  has  been 
conveyed. 

Remaining,  gentlemen, 

Your  obedient  servant, 

JNO.  H.  B.  LATROBE. 

To  Messrs.  J.  R.  TYSON, 

W.  PARKER  FOTJLKE, 
WILLIAM  B.  REED, 
A.  L.  ELWYN,  and 
J.  FRANCIS  FISHER. 


ADDRESS. 


GENTLEMEN  OF  THE  HISTORICAL  SOCIETY 

OF  PENNSYLVANIA:— 

I  AM  here,  to-night,  a  citizen  of  Maryland,  honored 
by  your  invitation  to  address  you  on  the  occasion  of 
your  anniversary;  and  the  topic  I  have  chosen  is  the 
boundary  between  our  respective  States. 

Adjacent  land-owners  rarely  take  much  interest  in 
the  title,  quality,  or  culture  of  their  neighbors'  fields ; 
but  they  are  generally  sufficiently  sensitive  to  the 
true  location  and  maintenance  of  the  division  fences. 
I  have,  therefore,  thought  that  I  might  count  upon 
your  patience,  while  I  occupied  my  allotted  hour 
with  the  history  and  description  of  Mason  and 
Dixon's  line. 

There  is,  perhaps,  no  line,  real  or  imaginary,  on 
the  surface  of  the  earth — not  excepting  even  the 
equator  and  the  equinoctial — whose  name  has  been 
oftener  in  men's  mouths  during  the  last  fifty  years. 
In  the  halls  of  legislation,  in  the  courts  of  justice,  in 
the  assemblages  of  the  people,  it  has  been  as  familiar 


6  THE   HISTORY   OF 

as  a  household  word.  Not  that  any  particular  inte 
rest  was  taken  in  the  line  itself;  but  the  mention  of 
it  was  always  expressive  of  the  fact,  that  the  States 
of  the  Union  were  divided  into  slaveholding  and 
non-slaveholding — into  Northern  and  Southern;1  and 
that  those,  who  lived  on  opposite  sides  of  the  line  of 

1  See  Bancroft,  TO!,  ii.  p.  396,  who  says:  "That  that  line  (referring  to 
Mason  and  Dixon's)  forms  the  present  division  between  the  States  resting  on 
free  labor,  and  the  States  that  tolerate  slavery,  is  due,  not  to  the  philan 
thropy  of  Quakers  alone,  but  to  climate."  Perhaps  less  to  climate  than  to 
interest.  Slavery,  south  of  Mason  and  Dixon's  line,  will  cease  to  exist  so 
soon  as  it  ceases  to  be  the  interest  of  land-owners  to  hold,  and  work  their 
fields  with,  slaves.  Bancroft's  mistake  is  in  attributing  slavery  to  climate, 
which  is  unchanging,  and  which  would  make  the  institution  lasting,  instead 
of  to  interest,  which  is  changeable,  and  which  may  cause  slavery  to  cease  to 
exist.  And  although  climate  certainly  is  connected  with  the  interest  which 
now  maintains  slavery,  yet  interest  may  readily  become  paramount  to  the 
effects  of  climate.  Thus,  there  are  very  many,  indeed,  who  believe,  that  if 
the  "  abolition  excitement"  had  not  made  slavery  in  Maryland  and  Kentucky, 
and  in  many  parts  of  Virginia,  a  matter  of  State  pride,  laws  for  prospective 
emancipation  would  long  ago  have  been  passed ;  and  for  the  simple  reason 
that,  while  slave-labor  is  profitable  in  the  culture,  just  now,  of  cotton,  and 
sugar,  and  rice,  it  is  not  so  profitable — in  many  instances,  it  is  a  losing  busi 
ness — in  the  culture  of  wheat.  The  slavery  question  of  the  United  States  is 
a  question  of  interest ;  and  its  solution  will  be  found  in  the  increasing  white 
population  of  the  country,  the  consequent  reduction  of  wages,  and  the  great 
ultimate  result—the  production,  by  free  labor,  of  the  chief  staples  of  the  coun 
try  cheaper  than  they  can  be  produced  by  slave-labor.  Voluntary  manu 
missions  will  then  free  the  slaves,  because  it  will  be  to  the  interest  of  the 
masters  to  get  rid  of  an  expensive  labor,  that  they  may  substitute  a  cheaper 
one ;  and  colonization  in  Africa,  which  has  already  built  up  a  Republic  there, 
will,  by  that  time,  have  established  a  commerce  with  that  country,  which 
will  afford  the  same  means  for  the  emigration  of  the  colored  race  that  com 
merce  with  Europe  now  affords  for  bringing  a  free  white  population  to  our 
shores. 


MASON   AND    DIXON'S   LINE. 


separation,  were  antagonistic  in  opinion  upon  an  all- 
engrossing  question,  whose  solution,  and  its  conse 
quences,  involved  the  gravest  considerations,  and  had 
been  supposed  to  threaten  the  integrity  of  the  Re 
public.  Its  geographical,  thus  became  lost  in  its 
political,  significance;  and  men  cared  little,  when 
they  referred  to  it,  where  it  ran,  or  what  was  its  his 
tory — or  whether  it  was  limited  to  Pennsylvania,  or 
extended,  as  has,  perhaps,  most  generally  been  sup 
posed,  from  the  Atlantic  to  the  Pacific.  It  suggested 
the  idea  of  negro  slavery;  and  that,  alone,  was 
enough  to  give  it  importance  and  notoriety,  though 
only  as  a  name. 

A  consequence  of  this  state  of  things  has  been  to 
perpetuate  the  memory  of  the  old  surveyors  who 
established  it.  A  rare  good  fortune  as  regards  their 
fame;  for,  while  the  engineers  who  located  the  road 
across  the  Simplon  have  been  forgotten  in  the  all- 
absorbing  renown  of  the  master  whom  they  served — 
while,  of  the  thousands  who  sail  past  the  Eddystone, 
not  one,  perhaps,  knows  who  it  was  that  erected,  on 
a  crag  in  the  midst  of  the  sea,  the  wondrous  light 
house  that  has  now  defied  the  tempests  of  a  cen 
tury — while  oblivion  has  been  the  lot  of  other  bene 
factors  of  mankind,  whose  works,  of  every-day  utility, 
should  have  been  their  enduring  monuments — Charles 
Mason  and  Jeremiah  Dixon,  who,  eighty-six  years 
ago,  ran  a  line  through  the  forest,  until  the  Indians 
forbade  the  further  progress  of  chain  and  compass, 


8  THE   HISTORY   OP 

and  whose  greatest  merit  seems  to  have  been  that  of 
accurate  surveyors,1  have  obtained  a  notoriety  for 
their  names  as  lasting  as  the  history  of  our  country. 

An  inspection  of  the  map  of  the  United  States 
shows  the  boundaries,  in  most  cases,  to  be,  either 
rivers,  the  crests  of  mountain  ranges,  parallels  of  lati 
tude,  or  meridians  of  longitude.  In  but  a  single  in 
stance  has  the  circle,  with  its  geometrical  accuracy, 
been  employed  to  indicate  a  dividing  line  of  conti 
guous  States;  and  the  inquiry  at  once  suggests  itself, 
why  the  southern  frontier  of  Pennsylvania  was  not 
prolonged  to  the  New  Jersey  shore,  why  the  eastern 
one  of  Maryland  was  not  made  to  strike  it,  and  why 
a  circle  should  be  the  northern  boundary  of  Dela 
ware — the  odd  result  of  which  has  been  to  leave  so 
narrow  a  strip  of  Pennsylvania  between  Delaware 
and  Maryland,  that  the  ball  of  one's  foot  may  be  in 
the  former,  the  heel  in  the  latter,  while  the  instep 
forms  an  arch  over  a  portion  of  the  "Keystone  State" 
itself.  The  explanation  of  this  is  closely  connected 
with  our  history,  and  will  be  given  as  we  progress 
with  it. 

On  the  20th  June,  1632,  Charles  the  Second,  then 
in  the  eighth  year  of  his  reign,  granted  to  Cecilius 
Calvert,  Lord  Baron  of  Baltimore — 

1  Mason  and  Dixon  were,  at  different  times,  elected  members  of  the 
American  Philosophical  Society — Mason  on  the  27th  March,  1767,  and 
Dixon  on  the  1st  April,  1768;  and,  in  the  notice  of  their  election,  they  are 
styled,  each,  "Surveyor,  of  London." — Proceedings  of  Amer.  Phil.  Soc. 


MASON   AND   DIXON'S   LINE.  9 

"All  that  part  of  the  Peninsula,  or  chersonese, 
lying  in  the  parts  of  America  between  the  ocean  on 
the  east,  and  the  Bay  of  Chesapeake  on  the  west, 
divided  from  the  residue  thereof  by  a  right  line, 
drawn  from  the  promontory  or  headland  called  Wat- 
kin's  Point,  situate  upon  the  bay  aforesaid,  and  near 
the  river  of  Wighco  on  the  west,  unto  the  main 
ocean  on  the  east,  and  between  that  boundary  on  the 
south,  and  that  part  of  the  Bay  of  Delaware  on  the 
north,  which  lieth  under  the  fortieth  degree  of  lati 
tude,  where  New  England  terminates."1 

At  this  early  day,  the  great  States  of  Pennsylvania 
and  New  York  had  no  existence  in  any  shape,  and 
the  northern  boundary  of  Maryland  was  the  southern 
boundary  of  New  England.  Within  the  latter,  New 
Plymouth  had  been  planted  in  1620,  and  Massachu 
setts  Bay  in  1629.  >  In  Maryland,  the  only  settle 
ments  were  those  made  by  William  Claiborne,  in 
1631,  on  Kent  Island,  in  the  Chesapeake.  The  name 
of  Claiborne,  in  connection  with  Maryland,  suggests 
at  once  an  episode  of  romantic  interest.  The  great 
living  historian  of  our  country,  who  first  mentions 
him  as  "  a  man  of  resolute  and  enterprising  spirit,"2 
introduces  him  into  the  narrative  of  events  with  dra 
matic  power,  when  he  describes  the  landing  of  Leon 
ard  Calvert  at  St.  Mary's,  in  1634,  and  adds,  that 

1  Kilty's  Laws  of  Maryland. 

2  Bancroft's  History  of  the  United  States,  vol.  i.  p.  236. 


10  THE   HISTORY   OF 

"  Claiborne  also  appeared,  though  as  a  prophet  of  ill 
omen,  to  terrify  the  company  by  predicting  the  fixed 
hostility  of  the  natives."  Afterwards,  when  dwelling 
on  the  "  auspices  under  which  the  province  of  Mary 
land  started  into  being,"  the  same  historian  says: 
"Everything  breathed  peace  but  Claiborne."  Again, 
he  calls  him  "the  malignant  Claiborne;"  again,  "the 
restless  Claiborne;"  and  even  when  mentioning  his 
favorable  reception  by  Charles  the  Second,  on  his 
visit  to  England,  attributes  it,  in  part,  to  "his  false 
representations."1  Chalmers,  largely  quoted  by  Ban 
croft,  styles  Claiborne  "  the  evil  genius  of  Maryland," 
and  speaks  of  him  as  one  who  seemed  "  to  have  been 
born  to  be  the  bane  of  the  province;"2  and  other 
historians,  taking  their  cue  from  Chalmers,  place  him 
in  the  category  of  unscrupulous  men,  the  exhalations 
of  unsettled  periods.  McMahon  alone  speaks  not 
unkindly  of  him;  and  yet,  even  McMahon  calls  him 
"  the  notorious  William  Claiborne."3  But,  twenty- 
four  years  is  a  long  while  for  mere  bravado  and  in 
trigue,  in  a  bad  cause,  to  maintain  possession  of  the 
public  mind;  and  it  is  difficult  to  believe  that  Clai 
borne,  who,  unquestionably,  occupied  it  for  this 
length  of  time,  had  not  a  better  claim,  and  was  not  a 
better  and  truer  man,  than  historians,  thus  far,  have 

1  Bancroft's  History  of  the  United  States,  vol.  i.  pp.  246,  248. 

2  Chalmers's  Political  Annals,  pp.  210,  221. 

3  McMahon's  History  of  Maryland,  p.  6. 


MASON   AND   DIXON?S   LINE.  11 

been  willing  to  admit.  The  accounts  that  we  possess 
of  him,  unfortunately  for  his  memory,  have  been 
transmitted  by  his  political  opponents.  The  untiring 
adversary  of  Lord  Baltimore,  his  reputation  has  been 
made  to  suffer,  that  the  other's  praise  might  be  ex 
aggerated.  But  the  time  will  arrive,  it  is  hoped, 
when  his  memory  will  be  relieved  from  the  imputa 
tions  of  contemporary  partisans,  and  when  the  truth 
will  be  known  in  regard  to  him  ;l  and  when  he  will 
be  recognized  as  the  brave  soldier,  the  gallant  gentle 
man,  acute  in  council,  whom  danger  could  not  turn 
aside  nor  defeat  dishearten — the  statesman  of  the 
wilderness,  the  attainted  of  the  proprietary  govern 
ment,  only  to  become,  in  turn,  the  commissioner  of 
the  Commonwealth  of  England,  to  subjugate  the  pro 
vince,  from  which  he  had  been  driven  as  a  rebel ;  and 
who,  for  a  quarter  of  a  century,  whether  in  power 
or  out  of  power,  exercised  an  influence,  or  inspired 
a  dread,  due  alone  to  "  his  unceasing  efforts  to  main- 

1  Mr.  S.  F.  Streeter,  of  Baltimore,  Secretary  of  the  Maryland  Historical 
Society,  has  devoted  himself  to  the  preparation  of  a  History  of  "Claiborne 
and  his  Times,"  and  has  collected  an  amount  of  rare,  and  curious,  and  au 
thentic  information,  to  which  I  have  had  the  privilege  of  referring,  that  fully 
justifies  all  that  is  said  of  Claiborne  in  the  text.  For  nearly  fifty  years,  he 
was  in  active  life ;  one-half  of  that  time  in  Maryland,  the  rest  of  it  in  Vir 
ginia,  where  he  died  at  an  advanced  age,  honored  and  lamented.  His  lineal 
descendants  are  numerous,  and  many  of  them  have  been  prominent  in  the 
affairs  of  the  country,  as  Governors  of  States,  Senators  and  Representatives 
in  Congress,  &c.  &c.  The  publication  of  Mr.  Streeter' s*  work  will  furnish  a 
valuable  contribution  to  the  colonial  history  of  Maryland  and  Virginia. 


12  THE   HISTORY   OF 

tain,  by  courage  and  address,  the  territory  which  his 
enterprise  had  discovered  and  planted."1 

But  Claiborne's  claims  had  no  ultimate  effect  upon 
the  boundaries  of  Maryland;  nor  would  they  now  be 
alluded  to,  save  that  no  sketch,  however  rapid,  of 
Maryland  affairs,  during  his  lifetime,  would  be  com 
plete,  wherein  his  name  chanced  to  be  omitted.2 

Trouble,  however,  was  brewing  for  Lord  Baltimore, 
in  regard  to  boundary,  in  another  quarter.  Godyn, 
a  Hollander,  had  purchased  from  the  natives  a  body 
of  land,  extending  for  thirty  miles  northwardly 
from  Cape  Henlopen.  This  was  in  1629  ;3  and  in 
1631,4  De  Vries,  another  Hollander,  planted  a  colony 

1  McMahon,  p.  7. 

2  In  all  the  histories  I  have  seen,  wherein  Claiborne's  name  is  mentioned, 
it  is  spelt  with  y,  not  i.     But  Claiborne's  own  spelling  was  with  an  {,  not  a 
y,  in  the  first  syllable— as  is  proved  by  the  two  fac-similes  of  autographs,  for 
which  I  am  indebted  to  Mr.  Streeter :  one  from  a  petition  to  Charles  the 
Second,  which  dates  back  to  the  early  part  of  his  Maryland  troubles ;  and 
one,  dated  in  1676,  when  he  was  an  aged  man. 

From  a  Petition  to  Charles  the  Second.  March  13,  1676-7. 


The  curious  in  such  matters  may  be  interested  in  knowing  that  Claiborne's 
coat  of  arms  was  thus  blazoned :  Argent — three  chevrons  interlaced,  at  the 
base,  sable,  with  a  chief  of  the  last. 

3  Brodhead's  History  of  New  York,  p.  200. 
'     4  Ibid.,  p.  206. 


MASON   AND   DIXON'S   LINE.  13 

and  built  a  fort  within  the  territory,  calling  it  Swaan- 
endael,  not  far  from  the  present  site  of  Lewis  town. 
Not  long  afterwards,  the  Indians  destroyed  the  settle 
ment,  put  the  inhabitants  to  death,  and  repossessed 
themselves  of  the  land.  They  only  covered  up,  how 
ever,  they  did  not  eradicate,  a  seed  that  was  one 
day  to  germinate  and  grow,  until  it  bore  bitter  fruit 
for  the  Lord  Proprietary  of  Maryland. 

When,  therefore,  Leonard  Calvert  arrived  at  St. 
Mary's,  in  1634,  the  soil  within  the  limits  of  the 
charter1  was  in  the  possession  of  the  natives,2  Clai- 
borne's  plantations  alone  excepted;  and,  had  he  made 
a  settlement  on  the  eastern  shore  of  the  Peninsula, 
there  would,  in  all  probability,  never  have  been  a 
State  of  Delaware.  But  in  1638,3  a  company  of 
Swedes  and  Fins,  under  the  auspices  of  Chancellor 
Oxenstiern,  repurchased  from  the  natives  the  land 
formerly  sold  to  the  Dutch,  and  built  a  fort  at  the 
mouth  of  Christina  Creek,  which  they  occupied  until 
1655,  when  an  invading  force  from  New  Amsterdam, 

1  The  Dutch  had  possession  of  the  left,  or  east  bank  of  the  Delaware,  prior 
to  this  time.     This  possession,  however,  as  was  always  contended,  gave  them 
no  claim  to  the  west  shore,  which  was  not  affected  in  any  way,  by  purchase  or 
possession,  until  the  purchase  by  Godyn.     The  first  settlement  of  the  Dutch 
in  the  Delaware  was  on  the  present  Jersey  shore,  about  four  miles  below 
Philadelphia,  where  Fort  Nassau  was  built  in  1623. — Brodhead's  History  of 
New  York,  p.  153. 

2  Swaanendael  was  abandoned  by  De  Vries  on  the  14th  April,  1633. — Brod 
head's  History  of  New  York,  p.  228. 

3  Brodhead,  p.  282. 


14  THE   HISTORY   OF 

under  Peter  Stuyvesant,  established  the  Dutch  rule, 
and  carried  back  the  Dutch  title,  by  relation,  to  the 
purchase  by  Godyn,1  and  the  settlement  by  De  Vries 
at  Swaanendael. 

In  1659,  Lord  Baltimore  seems  to  have  become 
uneasy  about  the  increase  of  the  Dutch  power  in  De 
laware,  and  he  sent  instructions  to  Maryland  to  have 
the  matter  looked  to.2  Fendall  was  then  governor.3 
An  embassy  was  resolved  on,  as  a  preliminary  to  the 
severer  measures  recommended  by  the  Proprietary; 
and  Colonel  Nathaniel  Utie,4  whose  name  is  still 
preserved  in  the  Island  of  Spes-Utiae,  at  the  mouth  of 
the  Susquehanna,  headed  a  deputation  to  "  the  pre 
tended  people"  across  the  Peninsula,  informing  them 
that  "  they  were  seated  within  his  lordship's  province 

1  In  the  histories  of  Maryland,  this  is  called  "Hore  Kill,"  "  Hoar  Kill," 
"  The  Whore  Kilns;"  but  the  settlement's  name  was   "Swaanendael,"  on  a 
stream  called  the  Horekill ;  and  as  I  refer  to  the  settlement,  and  not  the 
stream,  I  use  the  name  of  the  former. — See  Brodhead's  History  of  New  York, 
p.  206. 

2  MS.  Proceedings  in  the  possession  of  the  Maryland  Historical  Society. 

3  Brodhead's  History  of  New  York,  p.  606,  where  the  Dutch  ambassadors 
tell  Fendall,  the  Maryland  governor,  that,  until  Utie's  unwarrantable  pro 
ceedings,  there  never  had  been  any  difficulty  between  New  Netherlands  and 
Virginia  or  Maryland. 

4  For  an  interesting  and  graphic  account  of  Utie's  visit  to  "the  pretended 
people,"  see  Brodhead's  History  of  New  York,  pp.  664,  665,  667,  wherein 
Utie  is  made  to  appear  to  be  a  man  of  courage  and  action;  and,  certainly, 
from  what  Stuyvesant  is  reported  to  have  said  to  the  officers  who  received 
Utie,  he  may  be  fairly  said  to  have  bullied  the  Dutch,  for  they  were  censured 
for  "  want  of  prudence  and  courage"  in  their  whole  treatment  of  the  Mary- 
lander. 


MASON   AND    DIXON?S   LINE.  15 

without  notice."  -But  these  "  people"  were  in  pos 
session  of  the  land  by  conquest;  they  held  the  Swed 
ish  forts,  and  the  fair  fields  around  them,  as  victors; 
and  U  tie's  whole  force  consisted  but  of  six  followers: 
so  that,  although  the  ambassador  delivered  his  mes 
sage  "  in  a  pretty  harsh  and  bitter  manner,"1  they 
took  no  heed  of  it,  but  disregarded  wholly  what  they 
termed  his  "frivolous  demands  and  bloody  threaten- 
ings."  Nor  did  the  college  of  the  Dutch  West  India 
Company,  in  Europe,  to  whom  Lord  Baltimore  then 
appealed,  lend  a  more  attentive  ear,2  and  especially 
was  it  regardless  of  the  plea  that  the  Dutch  claim, 
based  on  purchase  and  possession,  was  no  better  than 
Claiborne's,  which  had  been  disallowed.  As  the 
world  went,  however,  in  those  days — whether  it  has 
mended  since  is  questionable; — there  was  a  great  dif 
ference  in  the  two  cases.  Claiborne  was  a  single  in 
dividual,  with  little  but  his  talent,  energy,  and  the 
justice  of  his  claims  to  rely  on.  The  Dutch  West 
India  Company  were  rich  and  powerful ;  and  their 
reliance  was  in  forts,  and  cannon,  and  soldiers:  and 
that  this  was  a  most  important  difference,  the  Mary- 
landers  seem  to  have  admitted;  for  their  efforts  to 
save  the  Peninsula  rarely  went  beyond  embassies  and 
remonstrances;  and  no  change  was  effected  in  the  re 
lations  of  the  parties,  on  the  debatable  ground,  until 

1  Brodhead,  p.  664. 

2  McM^hon,  p.  25 ;  Brodhead's  History,  p.  685. 


16  THE   HISTORY   OF 

the  Duke  of  York  took  possession  of  New  Amster 
dam  and  its  dependencies,  the  Dutch  settlements  on 
the  Peninsula,  under  a  grant  from  Charles  the  Second, 
in  1664.  This  gave  Lord  Baltimore  an  English  ruler 
on  the  Delaware  for  a  neighbor,  with  whom  there 
seems  to  have  been  peaceable  intercourse  for  some 
years.  But  in  July,  1673,  the  Dutch  repossessed 
themselves  of  the  New  Netherlands,1  and  held  them 
for  fifteen  months,  during  which  time  the  Maryland- 
ers  marched  to  Swaanendael  with  an  armed  force.2 
This  expedition,  however,  though  more  formidable 
than  Colonel  Utie's  embassy,  does  not  appear  to  have 
had  better  ultimate  results;  for,  in  1674,  we  find  the 
king  confirming  his  previous  grants  to  the  Duke  of 
York,3  and  learn  that  the  west  bank  of  the  Delaware, 

1  Bancroft,  vol.  ii.  p.  322. 

2  Bancroft,  who  mentions  this  expedition,  refers  to  Bacon's  Laws  of  Mary 
land,  1676,  chap.  21 ;   turning  to  which,  we  find  an  act  of  assembly  curious 
enough  to  be  cited  as  printed: — 

"  An  act  for  punishment  of  a  certain  abuse,  committed  by  Henry  Ward,  of 
Cecil  County,  gentleman,  against  the  Right  Honorable  the  Lord  Proprietary, 
and  the  public. 

"Viz:  Being  a  member  of  the  Lower  House,  in  1674,  and  informing  the 
House  that  he  had  lost  a  very  good  horse  in  the  country's  service,  in  the  late 
expedition  to  the  Whore  Kills,  the  assembly  allowed  him  1800  Ibs.  tobacco  in 
the  public  levy.  But,  it  being  now  made  evidently  appear  that  he  lost  no 
such  horse,  and  that  his  allegation  was  egregiously  false,  &c.,  he  was,  by  this 
act,  fined  4000  Ibs.  tobacco,"  &c. 

The  title  of  the  act  is  from  the  law  itself;  the  rest  is  the  compiler's  note. 

The  late  expedition  to  Whore  Kills,  spoken  of  as  such,  in  1674,  warrants  us 
in  supposing  it  to  have  taken  place  during  the  fifteen  months  of  Dutch  rule, 
from  July,  1673,  to  October,  1674. 

3  The  Case  of  the  Proprietors,  &c.     Hazard's  Register,  vol.  ii.  p.  202. 


MASON   AND   DIXON'S   LINE.  17 

on  the  Peninsula,  was  looked  upon  as  his  property  by 
everybody,  except  Lord  Baltimore  and  the  Mary- 
landers. 

And  now,  after  a  few  years,  a  new  actor  appeared 
upon  the  stage;  and  we  find  William  Penn  obtain 
ing  a  grant  of  land,  westward  of  the  Delaware,  and 
northward  of  Maryland,  on  the  4th  March,  1681.  A 
part  of  his  southern  boundary  was  to  be  "  a  circle 
drawn  at  twelve  miles  distant  from  Newcastle  north 
ward,  and  westwards  unto  the  beginning  of  the  40th 
degree  of  northern  latitude;"  and  to  the  difficulty  of 
tracing  this  circle  do  we  owe  Mason  and  Dixon's 
presence  in  America. 

In  August,  1681,  Penn  received,  through  his  agent 
and  kinsman,  Markham,  from  the  Governor  of  New 
castle,  "  that  extensive  forest,"  quoting  the  language 
of  Chalmers,  "  lying  twelve  miles  northward  of  New 
castle  on  the  western  side  of  the  Delaware;"1  and, 
early  in  the  following  year,  Markham  met  Lord  Bal 
timore  at  Upland,  now  Chester,  to  settle  the  bounda 
ries  of  the  two  provinces.  Upland  was  believed  to 
be  north  of  the  Maryland  line;  but  an  observation 
having  shown  that  it  was  twelve  miles  to  the  south 
of  it,  Penn's  agent  refused  to  act  further,  and  re 
turned  to  England  to  report  to  his  principal.2 

Now  Penn,  from  the  beginning,  had  been  dissatis- 

1  Chalmers's  Hist.  An's,  p.  640. 

2  Ibid.,  p.  641. 

3 


18  THE   HISTORY   OF 

fied  with  his  province,  inasmuch  "as  he  found  it 
lying  backwards,"  and  the  passage  up  Delaware  Bay 
"  a  place  of  difficult  and  dangerous  navigation,  espe 
cially  in  the  winter  season;"  and  he  had  accordingly 
"continually  solicited  the  Duke  of  York,  though  in 
vain,  for  a  grant  of  the  Delaware  colony."  "But, 
at  length" — I  use  the  words  of  Chalmers1 — "wearied 
with  solicitation,  or  hoping  for  benefit  from  a  posses 
sion  which  had  hitherto  yielded  him  none,  the  prince 
conveyed,  in  August,  1682,  as  well  the  town  of  New 
castle,  with  a  territory  of  twelve  miles  around  it,  as 
the  tract  of  land  extending  southward  from  it,  upon 
the  river  Delaware  to  Cape  Henlopen."2  The  disco 
very  of  the  true  latitude  at  Upland  made  this  grant 
more  than  ever  important  to  Penn;  and  with  the 
title  it  conferred,  such  as  it  was,  he  came  to  America, 
and  took  possession  of  the  territory  on  the  28th  Oc 
tober,  1682. 

And   so,   the   seed    sown    at    Swaanendael,   and 

1  Chalmers,  p.  643,  and  authorities  there  referred  to,  which  seem  to  make 
out  a  plain  case  to  the  effect  of  the  text. 

2  "  The  Case  of  the  Proprietors  and  Province  of  Pennsylvania,  and  the 
three  lower  counties  of  Newcastle,  Kent,  and  Sussex  on  Delaware,  to  be  heard 
before  the  Eight  Honorable  the  Lords  of  the  Committee  of  his  Majesty's 
most  Honorable  Privy  Council  for  Plantation  Affairs,  at  the  Cockpit  at  White 
Hall,  on  Thursday,  23d  February,  1737.    By  W.  Murray"— (Lord  Mansfield, 
afterwards.)     The  printed  paper,  prepared  for  the  committee,  is  in  the  col 
lection  of  the  Maryland  Historical  Society,  and  is  copied  into  Hazard's  Regis 
ter,  vol.  ii.  p.  200.     It  is  a  setting  forth  of  Penn's  case  by  his  counsel,  and  is 
a  useful  document,  both  as  regards  facts  and  dates;  the  latter  being  co 
piously  given. 


MASON   AND   DIXON'S   LINE.  19 

covered  up  and  trodden  upon  by  the  Indians,  and 
watered  with  blood,  had  germinated;  and  a  fair  tree, 
with  spreading  branches,  which  neither  Utie,  nor 
the  foray  of  1673,  had  been  able  to  uproot,  had 
arisen  from  it,  and  Penn  was  reposing  in  its  shade, 
on  the  banks  of  the  broad  river  that  flowed  past  it.1 
And  so,  Delaware  was  lost  to  Maryland. 

But  this,  though  the  ultimate  result,  was  not  ac 
complished  without  resistance  on  the  part  of  Lord 
Baltimore.  The  king,  in  council,  was  appealed  to. 
The  matter  was  referred  to  the  Committee  of  Trade 


1  It  is,  of  course,  idle  to  renew  now,  except  for  argument's  sake,  the  ques 
tions  mooted  and  settled  near  two  hundred  years  ago.  But  it  may  be  said, 
that  if  the  grant  of  Charles  I.  to  Lord  Baltimore  failed  to  carry,  in  effect, 
the  entire  territory  conveyed  in  terms,  because  of  the  adverse  possession  of 
the  Dutch  at  Hoarkill,  or  Swaanendael,  at  the  date  of  Lord  Baltimore's  charter, 
yet  that,  when  Charles  the  Second  obtained  the  title  to  the  whole  by  con 
quest,  through  the  Duke  of  York,  in  1664,  the  acquisition  ought  to  have 
enured  to  the  benefit  of  the  first  grantee ;  because,  notwithstanding  the  stress 
laid  by  Penn  upon  the  words  "  hactenus  inculta,"  in  Lord  Baltimore's  grant,  it 
can,  really,  hardly  be  supposed  that  the  king,  claiming  the  whole  territory  in 
virtue  of  Cabot's  discovery,  could  have  intended  to  recognize  and  protect  the 
Dutch  at  Swaanendael,  whom  he  could  only  have  regarded  as  "squatters" — 
to  apply  an  expressive  modern  term — upon  his  property.  But,  even  were  it 
otherwise,  and  "  hactenus  inculta"  excluded  the  Swaanendael  settlement,  yet 
it  was  surely  only  to  the  extent  of  the  possession  and  actual  cultivation — a 
single  brick  house  and  some  fields  adjacent,  such  as  might  have  been  cleared 
in  a  year  or  two.  And  it  is  difficult  to  see  how  this  brick  house  and  fields 
came  to  spread  themselves  out  until  they  covered  the  present  State  of  Dela 
ware.  As  already  said,  the  questions  involved  have  long  since  been  settled, 
and  against  the  views  here  taken ;  but  the  right  of  Penn,  under  the  grant  of 
the  Duke  of  York,  to  Delaware,  as  against  Lord  Baltimore,  might  not,  per 
haps,  be  quite  as  clear  were  it  to  be  litigated  now  as  it  was  in  1 685. 


20  THE   HISTORY   OF 

and  Plantations.  The  two  proprietors  appeared  be 
fore  it.  There  was  an  eager  controversy,  in  which 
Lord  Baltimore  relied  on  his  original  grant,  and 
Penn  on  the  fact  that  such  grant  expressly  reserved 
cultivated  lands,  and  consequently  the  settlement  of 
Swaanendael  and  its  results.1  Finally,  the  Commit 
tee,  following  a  common  practice  in  arbitrations,  split 
the  difference,2  directing  the  Peninsula,  north  of  a 
line  west  from  Cape  Henlopen,  to  be  divided  between 
the  parties;  and  so  Penn  obtained  a  road  to  his 
too-backward-lying  province  just  as  wide  and  as  long 
as  the  present  State  of  Delaware,  with  a  title  dating 
back  to  Godyn  and  De  Vries. 

This  was  on  the  13th  of  November,  1685,  when  the 
Duke  of  York,  under  whom  Penn  claimed,  was  king. 
Charters  were  of  small  consideration,  and  there  was 
a  quo  warranto  out  against  that  of  Maryland.3  Lord 
Baltimore's  policy  was  submission.  The  tide  was 
against  him.  At  last  it  turned.  But  it  placed  a 

1  "  The  Case  of  the  Proprietors,"  already  referred  to. 

2  This  division  of  the  peninsula  was,  perhaps,  not  an  original  idea  with  the 
Committee  of  Trade  and  Plantations ;  for,  in  the  discussion  which  took  place 
between  Governor  Fendall,   Heermans,  and  Waldron,  at  Patuxent,  on  the 
16th  October  1659,  the  Dutch  ambassadors,  while  denying  Lord  Baltimore's 
claim  in   toto,  yet,   "to  prevent  further  mischief,"   proposed  that   "three 
rational  persons"  might  be  chosen  from  each  province,  "to  meet  at  a  cer 
tain  day  and  time,  about  the  middle  of  between  the  Bay  of  Chesapeake  and  the 
aforesaid  south  river  (Delaware),  or  Delaware  Bay,  at  a  hill  lying  at  the  head 
of  Sassafras  River,"  with  full  power  to  settle  the  boundary  between  New 
Netherlands  and  Maryland. — Brodhead's  History  of  New  York,  p.  667. 

3  McMahon,  p.  33 ;  Bancroft,  ii.  p.  243. 


MASON   AND   DIXON'S   LINE.  21 

Protestant  upon  the  throne,  and  was  followed  by  a 
sectarian  tempest  in  Maryland  that  prostrated  the 
proprietary  government,  and  threw  the  province  into 
the  hands  of  the  crown,  by  which  its  affairs  were 
administered  until  1716.1  Penn  was  not  much  better 
off  in  these  times  than  Lord  Baltimore.  Pennsyl 
vania,  like  Maryland,  was  taken  from  the  proprietor, 
and  although  soon  restored  to  him,  yet  he,  as  well  as 
his  neighbors,  had  cogent  reasons  for  postponing  the 
controversies  about  boundary.2 

On  the  accession  of  Queen  Anne,  Penn  was  able 
to  obtain  an  order  in  council  on  the  23d  of  June, 
1708,  for  the  enforcement  of  the  decision  of  1685,3 
but  nothing  was  done  under  it,  and  in  1718  he  died; 
and  in  February,  1723,  we  find  Mistress  Penn  making 
an  agreement  with  Lord  Baltimore  to  preserve  peace 
upon  the  borders  for  eighteen  months,  in  the  expecta 
tion  that  during  this  time  the  boundaries  could  be 
settled.4  But  border  feuds  are  not  to  be  stayed  by 
parchments;  and  things  seemed  to  have  reached  a 
pass  that  made  it  necessary  for  the  proprietors  to 
address  themselves  in  earnest  to  the  adjustment  of 
their  differences;  and  accordingly,  on  the  10th  of 
May,  1732,  a  deed  was  executed  between  the  child 
ren  and  devisees  of  Penn  and  the  great  grandson  of 

1  McMahon,  p.  35. 

2  1  Proud.,  pp.  347,  377. 

3  The  Case  of  the  Proprietors,  &c. ;  Hazard,  p.  200 ;  1  Proud.,  p.  294. 

4  -Ibid. 


22  THE   HISTORY   OF 

the  first  Lord  Baltimore,  stipulating,  in  effect,  for  a 
line  due  west  from  Cape  Henlopen,1  across  the  Penin 
sula,  from  whose  centre  another  line  should  be 
drawn  tangent  to  a  circle  twelve  miles  from  New 
castle,  while  a  meridian  from  the  tangent  point 
should  be  continued  to  within  fifteen  miles  from 
Philadelphia,  whence  should  be  traced  the  parallel  of 
latitude  westward  that  was  to  divide  the  provinces. 
Should  the  meridian  cut  a  segment  from  the  circle, 
the  segment  was  to  be  a  part  of  Newcastle  County. 
This  parallel  of  latitude  is  the  Mason  and  Dixon's 
line  of  history. 

Attached  to  this  agreement  was  a  small  map,  well 
known  as  Lord  Baltimore's  map.  It  represented  the 
general  features  of  the  country  in  relation  to  the 
boundary;  and  the  outline  of  the  State  of  Delaware 
is  marked  on  it  in  red  lines,  supposed  to  have  been 
drawn  by  Lord  Baltimore  himself.  One  looks  with 
some  interest  on  these  red  lines,  and  recollects  their 
potency.  A  king,  remarkable  in  history  mainly 
through  the  circumstances  of  his  death  upon  the 
scaffold,  had  granted  to  a  subject  what  it  cost  the 
monarch  nothing  to  acquire — the  homes,  across  the 

1  The  Cape  Henlopen  here  referred  to  is  not  the  point  now  known  as  such, 
opposite  to  Cape  May,  and  which  is  called  Cape  Cornelius  on  Lord  Balti 
more's  map,  but  the  point  where  the  States  of  Maryland  and  Delaware  now 
abut  together  upon  the  ocean,  marked  Fenwick's  Island  on  the  latest  map 
of  Maryland,  about  fifteen  miles  to  the  southward  of  the  present  Cape 
Henlopen. 


MASON   AND   DIXON'S   LINE.  23 

sea,  of  a  free  and  brave  people,  whose  hospitality  and 
unsuspecting  confidence  alone  made  the  grant  avail 
able;  and,  with  royal  magnificence,  had  bounded  his 
gift  by  parallels  of  latitude,  the  courses  of  mighty 
rivers,  and  the  headlands  of  ocean;  and  the  subject, 
with  scale  and  compasses,1  apportioned  his  territory 
with  his  neighbors,  settled  the  lines  of  what  were  to 
become  adjacent  sovereignties,  and  thus  accelerated 
the  progress  of  those  events  which,  at  length,  extin 
guished  the  council-fires  at  which  his  ancestors  had 
warmed  themselves  when  they  were  strangers  in  the 
land,  and  whose  last  faint  blaze  was  fed  with  the  un 
strung  bows  and  blunted  arrows  of  the  forest  princes 
of  the  Peninsula.  One  looks  with  interest,  we  say, 
on  handiwork  so  trifling,  when  it  becomes  so  potent 
for  results;  and  the  map,  in  reality,  subsequently 
became  of  great  significance. 

But  it  was  one  thing  to  execute  the  deed  of  1732 
on  parchment,  and  another  thing  to  execute  it  on 
the  disputed  territory. 

1  ''Instructions"  MS.  at  Annapolis,  quoting  the  testimony  of  Mr.  Paris, 
describing  Lord  Baltimore,  in  the  presence  of  the  Penns,  looking  at  the  maps, 
"when  the  defendant,  Lord  Baltimore,  measured  with  a  pair  of  compasses 
one  of  said  written  maps,  and  took  his  scale  or  measure  from  the  distance 
between  Newcastle  and  the  circle,  or  part  of  the  circle  there  drawn,  and  from 
such  measure  set  off  a  larger  distance  for  fifteen  miles  south  of  Philadelphia, 
at  which  distance  he  wanted  his  head  or  northern  boundary  should  be 
marked  on  one  of  the  written  maps  accordingly." 

"Lord  Baltimore's  map"  was  engraved  on  copper,  and  impressed,  or 
printed,  upon  all  the  deeds,  commissions,  &c.  relating  to  the  boundary 
question. 


24  THE   HISTORY   OF 

In  the  first  place,  there  was  a  difficulty  in  fixing 
the  point  in  Newcastle  that  was  to  be  the  centre  of 
the  circle.  In  the  next  place,  it  was  questioned 
whether  the  twelve  miles  were  to  be  a  radius  or  the 
periphery;  and  lastly,  there  was  a  doubt  about  the 
true  Cape  Henlopen.  The  result  was  to  suspend 
proceedings  under  the  deed.1 

And  now,  Lord  Baltimore  did  what  neither  im 
proved  his  cause  nor  bettered  his  reputation.  Treat 
ing  his  own  deed  as  a  nullity,  he  asked  George  the 
Second  for  a  confirmatory  grant  according  to  the  terms 
of  the  charter  of  1632.2  It  was  very  properly  refused, 
and  the  parties  were  referred  to  the  Court  of  Chan 
cery;  and  here  Lord  Hardwicke  decided,  in  effect,3 
that  the  true  Henlopen  was  the  point  insisted  on  by 
the  Penns;  that  the  centre  of  the  circle  was  the 
middle  of  Newcastle,  as  near  as  it  could  be  ascer 
tained;  and  that  the  twelve  miles  were  a  radius  and 
not  the  periphery.  This  was  in  1750.  Other  diffi 
culties  now  arose.  It  was  important  to  Lord  Bal 
timore  to  shorten,  if  possible,  the  statute  mile;  and 

1  The  difficulties  made  by  the  Maryland  commissioners,  and  the  arguments 
thereupon — which  are  able  and  copious — on  both  sides,  are  to  be  found  in  a 
paper  in  the  archives   at  Annapolis,  indorsed:    "Instructions   on  several 
doubts  arising  among  the  commissioners  touching  the  execution  of  the  decree 
in  the  case  of  Penns  vs.  Lord  Baltimore."     The  paper  is  without  date,  but  is 
evidently  a  law  paper  issuing  from  the  Court  of  Chancery  in  the  case  re 
ferred  to. 

2  Case  of  the  Proprietors,  &c. 

3  1  Vesey,  Sen.,  444. 


MASON   AND   DIXON'S   LINE.  25 

the  mode  his  friends  adopted  was  to  measure  it  on 
the  surface  of  the  ground,  and  not  horizontally.  So 
Lord  Hardwicke  was  again  applied  to,  and  horizontal 
measurements  were  adopted.  This  was  in  March, 
1751.  Still,  things  were  not  clear.  The  shorter  the 
line  across  the  Peninsula — its  beginning  on  the  Dela 
ware  side  being  fixed — the  better  for  Lord  Baltimore, 
for  the  nearer  would  the  centre  of  it  be  to  the  river. 
And  so  here,  again,  his  friends  came  to  his  aid,  and 
insisted  that  Slaughter's  Creek,  a  channel  separating 
Taylor's  Island  from  the  Chesapeake,  gave  the 
western  terminus.1  But  the  Penns  demanded  that 
the  line  should  be  continued  to  the  bay  shore  itself, 
from  which  the  broad  waters  of  the  great  estuary 
stretched,  unbroken  by  headland  or  island,  to  the 
remote  and  dim  horizon.  And  again  was  Lord  Hard 
wicke  referred  to.  But,  in  the  meantime,  Lord  Bal 
timore  died,  and  the  suit  abated,  and  the  whole  pro 
ceedings  fell  to  the  ground.  When  they  were  re 
vived,  and  the  heir  of  Lord  Baltimore  was  made  a 

'  From  the  east  side  of  Slaughter's  Creek  to  the  west  shore  of  Taylor's 
Island  was  about  three  miles ;  so  that  the  advantage  to  Lord  Baltimore,  had 
the  line  stopped  at  the  creek,  would  have  been  a  wedge  of  land  a  mile  and  a 
half,  or  thereabouts,  wide  at  the  southern  end,'  running  out  to  nothing  at  the 
tangent  point,  some  eighty  odd  miles  distant.  The  exact  difference  in  the 
length  of  the  lines  was  3  miles  273  J  perches,  and  the  exact  distance  to  the 
tangent  point  81  miles,  73  chains,  30  links.  Could  the  pretence  that  the 
twelve  miles  were  a  periphery,  and  not  a  radius,  have  been  sustained,  there 
would  have  been  taken  from  Delaware  the  above  length  by  a  width  of  one 
and  a  half  miles  at  the  southern,  and  about  eight  miles  at  the  northern  end. 


26  THEHISTORYOF 

party  to  them,  new  difficulties  were  presented  in  his 
refusal  to  be  bound  by  the  acts  of  his  ancestor.  If, 
however,  there  was  anything  that  could  equal  the 
faculty  of  the  Marylanders  in  making  trouble  in  this 
long  lawsuit,  it  was  the  untiring  perseverance  with 
which  the  Penns  devoted  themselves  to  the  contest, 
and  followed  their  opponents  in  all  their  doublings. 
And  they  had  their  reward;  for,  on  the  4th  of  July, 
1760,  another  deed  was  executed,  under  which  the 
controversy  was  finally  closed.1 

It  is  not  intended  here  to  discuss  the  quantum  of 
blame  proper  to  be  attached  to  the  parties  respect 
ively,  who,  from  time  to  time,  figured  in  these  trans 
actions.  The  inquiry  is  not  germaki  to  the  matter 
in  hand,  and  would  be  otherwise  unprofitable.  When 
the  actions  of  the  dead  are  made  a  shibboleth  of 
party,  their  examples  become  practically  useless  as 
historical  teachings.  The  attempt  to  exhume  the 
details  of  buried  periods  of  religious  or  high  politi 
cal  excitement,  creates  too  often,  as  experience  has 
shown,  a  cloud  of  human  passions  above  the  living 
laborers,  which  obscures  the  truth  to  the  eyes  of  the 
present  generation.  If  the  title  of  the  elder  Penn, 
derived  from  the  Duke  of  York,  which  rested  on  the 


1  The  deed  of  1760  has  been  printed  by  Mr.  Edward  D.  Ingraham,  a 
lawyer  of  standing  at  the  bar  of  Philadelphia.  It  is  a  treatise  in  itself;  and, 
whether  for  technical  accuracy,  as  a  rare  piece  of  conveyancing,  legal  learn 
ing,  or  historical  interest,  is  not  surpassed  by  any  paper  of  its  kind.  The 
duplicate  original  is  preserved  in  the  archives  of  Maryland  at  Annapolis. 


MASON   AND   DIXON'S   LINE.  27 

conquest  of  Peter  Stuyvesant,  which,  in  its  turn, 
went  back  to  the  purchase  by  Godyn  and  the  oblite 
rated  settlement  of  De  Vries — if  this  title  was  an 
indifferent  one,  inconsistent  as  it  was  with  the  terms 
of  the  grant  to  Lord  Baltimore;  and  if  the  bisection 
of  the  Peninsula,  at  Penn's  instance,  by  the  Commit 
tee  of  Trade  and  Plantations,  had  more  in  it  of  con 
venience  than  justice,  yet  the  successive  lords  proprie 
tary  of  Maryland,  as  this  rapid  sketch  has  shown, 
were,  perhaps,  quite  as  loose  in  their  attempts  to 
preserve  their  territory  as  their  opponents  had  been 
in  the  proceedings  that  gave  them  foothold  upon  it. 
The  truth  probably  is,  that  the  Penns  and  Lord  Bal 
timore  had  not  less  land-greed,  because  their  posses 
sions  were  estimated  in  square  miles,  than  is  common 
to  those  who  count  by  square  feet  only.  With  them, 
the  affair  was  a  business  one,  and  they  treated  it  so 
throughout.1  The  elder  Penn  and  the  first  Lord  Pro- 

1  There  is,  in  the  collection  of  the  Maryland  Historical  Society,  a  manu 
script  map  made  by  Col.  Thomas  Cresap,  showing  the  country  about  the 
western  confines  of  Maryland,  on  which  there  is  the  following  indorsement 
in  a  handwriting  of  a  much  later  date: — 

"The  Lords  Baltimore,  in  their  disputes  with  the  Penns  on  one  border, 
and  Lord  Fairfax  on  the  other,  had  long  and  deep  heads  to  contend  with,  and 
did  not  get  their  full  rights.  If  Lord  Frederick  (who  signed  the  deed  of 
1760)  had  come  over  to  Maryland,  and  lived  among  his  tenants,  instead  of 
running  about  the  continent  of  Europe,  from  Paris  to  Constantinople,  and 
threading  the  labyrinth  of  the  Grecian  Archipelago,  having  pictures  drawn 
of  the  Greek  females  of  the  different  islands,  it  would  have  been  better  for 
himself  and  his  province;  and  he  would  have  escaped  the  censure  of  Sterne, 


28  THE   HISTORY   OF 

prietary  of  Maryland  owe  their  prominence  in  Ameri 
can  history  to  considerations  remote  from  the  merits 
of  the  minor  questions  here  discussed.  The  princi 
ples  upon  which  governments  are  founded,  and  not 
the  extent  of  territory  they  affect,  or  the  mode  of  its 
acquisition,  mainly  attract  to  them  the  attention  of 
mankind. 

The  temptation  is  strong  to  fill  up  the  meagre  out 
line  here  given  of  the  boundary  controversy,  between 
Pennsylvania  and  Maryland,  with  some  details  of  the 
border  life  of  the  period  in  question.  But  time  does 
not  permit.  The  prose  and  poetry  of  Scott  have 
made  the  borders  of  Scotland  immortal.  The  same 
great  novelist  would  have  found  in  the  feuds  of  the 
Peninsula,  and  along  the  northern  confines  of  Mary 
land,  as  ample  materials  for  his  genius  to  combine,  as 
much  diversity  of  character  and  as  thrilling  incident, 
as  magnificent  scenery,  and  as  wild  adventure,  as 
were  furnished  him  by  the  history  of  his  native  land. 
The  Catholic  gentleman  of  Maryland,  gallant,  brave, 
and  impetuous — his  battle-cry  "  Hey  for  Saint  Ma 
rie's  ! " — the  stern  uncompromising  Puritan,  shouting 

•who,  in  his  Sentimental  Journey,  has  given  him,  under  the  name  of  Mundun- 
gus,  to  the  world,  in  no  enviable  light." 

The  writer  of  the  above  had,  doubtless,  in  his  mind,  "  A  Tour  to  the  East,  in 
the  years  1763  and  1764,  with  Remarks  on  the  City  of  Constantinople  and  the 
Turks.  Also,  Select  Pieces  of  Oriental  Wit,  Poetry,  and  Wisdom.  By  F.  Lord 
Baltimore.  London:  Printed  by  W.  Richardson  and  S.  Clark.  MDCCLXVII." 
A  copy  of  this,  in  the  collection  of  the  Historical  Society  of  Maryland,  cer 
tainly  does  not  put  Lord  Baltimore  on  a  level  with  the  author  of  Anacharsis. 


MASON   AND   DIXON'S   LINE.  29 

as  he  fought,  "  In  the  name  of  God,  fall  on."1  The 
Swedes  and  the  Hollanders, — and,  among  the  Indians, 
the  Susquehannas,  and  the  Minquaas,  and  the  Dela- 
wares,  were  all  active  in  the  strife  that  prevailed  for  a 
long  series  of  years.  Nor  was  it  confined  to  indivi 
duals.  Cresap's  quarrel  involved  the  provinces  in  what 
was  almost  open  war;2  and,  in  "the  Case  stated,"  that 
has  more  than  once  been  resorted  to  in  the  prepara 
tion  of  this  address,  it  is  charged  that,  on  the  death 
of  Gordon,  the  Governor  of  Pennsylvania,  in  1736, 
"the  invasions  from  Maryland  became  more  terrible 
and  more  frequent."3  The  troubles  at  the  manor  of 

1  Bozman,  vol.  ii.  p.  525 ;  where  an  account  is  furnished  of  the  battle  of 
the  Severn,  March  26,  1654. 

"  Then  the  word  was  given,  In  the  name  of  God,  fall  on  ;  God  is  our  strength; 
that  was  the  word  for  Providence  (the  then  name  of  Annapolis).  The  Mary- 
lander's  word  was,  Hey  for^aint  Marie's.  The  charge  was  fierce  and  sharp 
for  a  time ;  but,  through  the  glorious  presence  of  the  Lord  of  Hosts,  mani 
fested  in  and  towards  his  poor  oppressed  people,  the  enemy  could  not  endure, 
but  gave  back,"  &c.  &c. — Babylon's  Fall,  by  Leonard  Strong. 

2  Day,  in  his  Historical  Collections,  p.  693,  calls  Cresap  "  a  blustering  and 
desperate  bully,  who  had  volunteered  his  services  to  the  Governor  of  Mary 
land  to  raise  a  party  of  marauders  to  drive  off  the  Pennsylvania  settlers." 
This  is  a  very  different  character  from  that  given  to  him  by  Mr.  Brantz 
Mayer,  in  a  very  admirable  discourse  pronounced  by  him  before  the  Mary 
land  Historical  Society,  called  "Logan  and  Captain  Michael  Cresap,"  May 
9,  1851. 

A  small  volume,  The  Life  of  Michael  Cresap,  was  published  at  Frederick- 
town,  Maryland,  in  1826.  It  is  without  arrangement,  and  has  neither  begin 
ning  nor  ending;  but  is  valuable,  nevertheless,  as  connected  with  border 
troubles.  There  is  a  copy  in  the  collection  of  the  Maryland  Historical  So 
ciety. 

3  Hazard's  Register,  vol.  ii.  p.  212. 


30  THE   HISTORY   OF 

Nottingham,  near  Chester,  brought  Hart,  the  Go 
vernor  of  Maryland,  and  Keith,  the  Governor  of 
Pennsylvania,  with  their  respective  retinues  of  armed 
men,  together  upon  the  scene;1  and,  indeed,  there 
was  hardly  a  settlement  upon  the  boundary,  or  near 
to  it,  that  had  not  its  attendant  narrative  of  romantic 
interest.  Then,  again,  there  were  the  time-servers  of 
those  days,2  the  men  who  "  carried  water  on  both 
shoulders,"  to  use  the  phrase  that  has  come  down  to 
us,  and,  with  a  patent  from  Lord  Baltimore,  and  a 
grant  from  Penn,  obtained  exemption  from  all  ser 
vice,  by  being  Marylanders  when  called  upon  from 
Pennsylvania,  and  Pennsylvanians  when  Maryland 
had  need  of  them. 

These  are  themes  for  the  future  novelist,  however, 
rather  than  the  historian.  They  had  but  small  in 
fluence,  if  any,  on  the  general*  current  of  public 
affairs;  and  they  are  referred  to  only  for  the  purpose 
of  showing  that  too  much  importance  was  not  at 
tached  to  the  settlement  of  the  boundary  between 
the  provinces.  To  this  we  will  now  return. 

The  commissioners  appointed  under  the  deed  of 
1760  addressed  themselves,  at  once,  to  the  comple- 

1  McMahon,  p.  36. 

2  The  deed  of  1732.     The  original  is  not  to  be  found  in  the  archives  of 
Maryland,  where  a  duplicate  original  ought  to  be ;  but  there  is  a  printed 
copy,  with  the  following  imprint  to  the  pamphlet:   "Philadelphia:  Printed 
by  B.  Franklin,  at  the  new  printing-office  near  the  market.     MDCCXXXIII." 
A  rough  copy  (wood  cut)  of  Lord  Baltimore's  map  is  appended  to  the  deed. 


MASON   AND   DIXON'S   LINE.  31 

tion  of  the  peninsular  east  and  west  line,  and  to 
tracing  the  twelve  mile  circle — appointing  to  this 
end  the  best  surveyors  they  could  obtain.  The  mode 
of  proceeding  was  to  measure  with  the  common 
chain,  holding  it  as  nearly  horizontal  as  they  could, 
the  direction  being  kept  by  sighting  along  poles,  set 
up  in  what  they  called  vistos,  cut  by  them  through 
the  forest.  The  original  field-notes  of  these  surveys 
are  preserved  in  the  Maryland  archives,  and  do  credit 
to  the  parties.1 

But  the  progress  made  was  very  slow;  and,  at  the 
end  of  three  years,  little  more  was  accomplished  than 
the  peninsular  line  and  the  measurement  of  a  radius. 
This  seems  to  have  disappointed  the  expectations  of 
the  proprietors,  for  we  find  that,  on  the  4th  of  August, 
1763,  the  Penns,  Thomas  and  Richard,  and  Lord 
Baltimore,  then  being  together  in  London,  agreed 
with  Charles  Mason2  and  Jeremiah  Dixon,  "  two  ma- 


1  The  surveyors  of  1761  were,  John  F.  A.  Priggs,  John  Lukens,  Archibald 
McClean,  Archibald  Emory,  Jonathan  Hall,  John  Watson,  John  Stapler,  Tho 
mas  Garnett,  and  William  Shankland;  of  these,  Garnett,  Hall,  Lukens,  and 
McClean  seem  to  have  been  the  most  active. — See  Archives  at  Annapolis,  and 
Proceedings  of  the  Commissioners. 

In  1763,  David  Rittenhouse  had  been  employed  by  the  Penn  family  "in 
making  some  geographical  arrangements  preparatory  to  the  final  establish 
ment  of  the  boundaries." — Memoirs  of  Rittenhouse,  p.  146. 

2  The  facts  and  dates,  regarding  the  doings  of  Messrs.  Mason  and  Dixon 
in  running  their  lines,  are  all  obtained  from  their  original  field-notes  pre 
served  in  the  State  Department  at  Annapolis. 

Bancroft  speaks  of  Mason  and  Dixon  as  having  run  the  line  in  1761.     It 


32  THE   HISTORY   OF 

thematicians  or  surveyors,"  "  to  mark,  run  out,  settle, 
fix,  and  determine  all  such  parts  of  the  circle,  marks, 
lines,  and  boundaries,  as  were  mentioned  in  the  seve 
ral  articles  or  commissions,  and  were  not  yet  com 
pleted."  And,  thus,  Mason  and  Dixon  appear  upon 
the  scene,  leaving  England  towards  the  close  of  Au 
gust,  and  landing  at  Philadelphia  on  the  15th  of 
November,  1763.  They  began  their  work  at  once. 
They  adopted  the  peninsular  east  and  west  line  of 
their  predecessors,  the  radius  and  the  tangent  point. 
This  left  them  the  tangent,  from  the  middle  point  of 
the  peninsular  line,  to  "  the  tangent  point,"  the  me 
ridian  from  thence  to  a  point  fifteen  miles  south  of 
the  most  southern  part  of  the  city  of  Philadelphia, 
with  the  arc  of  the  circle  to  the  west  of  it,  the  fifteen 
mile  distance,  and  the  parallel  of  latitude  westward 
from  its  termination,  to  ascertain  and  establish. 

was  not  commenced  till  1764,  and  not  completed  by  them  until  1767,  and  not 
finally  marked  till  1768. — See  Bancroft,  vol.  ii.  p.  396. 

Mason  was  an  assistant  of  Dr.  Bradley  at  the  Royal  Observatory  at 
Greenwich.  — Encyclopedia  Americana. 

After  their  employment  in  America,  they  were  employed,  under  the  direc 
tion  of  the  Royal  Society,  to  observe  the  transit  of  Venus  across  the  sun  at 
the  Cape  of  Good  Hope,  in  1769. — Philosophical  Transactions,  vol.  Iviii.  p.  270. 
London. 

When  Mayer's  Lunar  Tables  were  sent  to  London  to  compete  for  the  prize 
offered  by  the  Board  of  Longitude,  Mason  made  improvements  and  correc 
tions  in  them,  and  they  were  published  as  "  Mayer's  Lunar  Tables,  improved 
by  Mr.  Charles  Mason,"  in  1787.  Lalande  says,  in  his  Bib.  Astron.,  p.  601 : 
"  Mason  fut  desespere  de  n' avoir  pas  les  250,000  livres  qu'il  croyait  lui  etre 
dues  pour  les  tables  de  la  lune ;  mais  il  avait  mal  interpret  1'acte  du  parle- 
ment:  ses  tables  n'etaient  pas  faites  d'apres  la  the'orie." — Delambre,  Bio- 
graphie  Universelle. 


MASON   AND   DIXON'S   LINE.  33 

They  brought  to  their  task,  we  may  suppose,  more 
perfect  instruments,  and  more  accurate  mathematical 
knowledge,  than  the  previous  surveyors.1  But,  so 
far  as  the  work  of  these  last  went,  Mason  and  Dixon 
do  not  seem  to  have  mended  it;  for  they  record,  in 
their  proceedings  of  November  13,  1764,  that  the 
true  tangent  line,  ascertained  by  themselves,  "  would 
not  pass  one  inch  to  the  westward  or  eastward"  of 
the  post  marking  the  tangent-point  set  in  the  ground 
by  those  whom  they  superseded;  so  that,  after  all, 
the  sighting  along  poles,  and  the  rude  chain-measure 
ments  of  1761  and  1762,  would  have  answered  every 
purpose,  had  the  proprietors  only  thought  so.2 

Having  verified  the  tangent  point,  they  proceeded 

1  "  The  astronomical  observations  were  made  with  an  excellent  sector  of  six 
feet  radius,  constructed  by  Mr.  Bird,  the  first  which  ever  had  the  plumb-line 
passing  over  and  bisecting  a  point  at  the  centre  of  the  instrument." — Maske- 
lyne's  Introduction  to  Mason's  Observations:    Philosophical  Transactions,  vol. 
Iviii.  p.  271,  17C8. 

The  sector  would  seem  to  have  belonged  to  Mr.  Penn. 

2  The  volume  of  the  Philosophical  Transactions,  above  referred  to,  contains 
a  very  minute  description  of  Mason  and  Dixon's  mode  of  continuing  a  right 
line,  which  they  begin  by  saying  "was  done  by  setting  up  marks  with  the 
assistance  of  an  equal  altitude  or  transit  instrument  (for  it  was  contrived  so 
as  to  serve  either  purpose  at  pleasure),  made  by  Mr.  John  Bird,  of  the  same 
construction  with  that  described  by  Le  Monnier,  in  the  preface  to  the  single 
volume  of  the  French  Histoire  Celeste."     "  The  telescope  magnified  25  times." 
Ibid.,  p.  274. 

"  The  measurements  were  made  with  a  chain,  established  from  a  brass  sta 
tute-yard  which  was  proved  and  corrected,  in  the  course  of  the  work,  by 
another  statute-chain  (kept  only  for  that  purpose)  made  from  the  said  brass 
yard."— Ibid.,  p.  277. 

5 


34  THE   HISTORY   OF 

to  measure,  on  its  meridian,  fifteen  miles  from  the 
parallel  of  the  most  southern  part  of  Philadelphia, 
the  north  wall  of  a  house  on  Cedar  Street  occupied 
by  Thomas  Plumstead  and  Joseph  Huddle.  They 
thus  ascertained  the  north-eastern  corner"  of  Mary 
land,  which  was,  of  course,  the  beginning  of  the 
parallel  of  latitude  that  had  been  agreed  upon  as  the 
boundary  between  the  provinces. 

On  the  17th  of  June,  1765,  they  had  carried  the 
parallel  of  latitude  to  the  Susquehanna,  and  there 
upon  received  instructions  to  continue  it  "as  far  as 
the  provinces  of  Maryland  and  Pennsylvania  were 
settled  and  inhabited." 

On  the  27th  of  October,  they  had  reached  the 
North  Mountain,  and  they  record  in  their  journal 
that  they  got  Captain  Shelby  to  go  with  them  to  its 
summit,  "  to  show  them  the  course  of  the  Potomac," 
when  they  found  that  they  could  see  the  Allegheny 
Mountain  for  many  miles,  and  judged  it,  "by  its  ap 
pearance,  to  be  about  fifty  miles  distance,  in  the 
direction  of  the  line." 

On  the  4th  of  June,  in  the  following  year,  1766, 
we  find  them  on  the  summit  of  the  Little  Allegheny, 
and  at  the  end  of  that  summer's  work.  The  Indians 
were  now  troublesome,  and  they  were  masters  in  the 
woods.1 

1  One  of  the  few  remarks  contained  in  the  field-notes  of  Mason  and 
Dixon  is  made  under  date  of  September  25th  of  this  year,  1766,  as  they 


MASON   AND   DIXON'S   LINE.  35 

111  1767,  the  surveyors  began  operations  on  the 
parallel  of  latitude,  late.  A  negotiation  with  the 
Six  Nations  was  necessary,  which  Sir  William  John 
son  had  promised  to  conduct,  and  this  was  not  con 
cluded  "before  May ;  so  that  it  was  not  until  the  8th 
of  June  that  the  surveyors  reached  their  halting- 
place  of  the  preceding  year,  on  the  summit  of  the 
Little  Allegheny.  On  the  14th  of  June  they  had  ad 
vanced  as  far  as  the  summit  of  the  Great  Allegheny, 
where  they  were  joined  by  an  escort  of  fourteen  In 
dians,  with  an  interpreter, 'deputed  by  the  Chiefs  of 
the  Six  Nations  to  accompany  them.  And  so  the  In 
dian  becomes  their  protector  against  the  Indian,  as 
they  mark  the  boundary  of  the  sovereignties  that, 
before  long,  are  to  obliterate  the  very  memory  of  their 
aboriginal  possessors.  And  the  escort  seem  to  have 
had  some  vague  apprehension  in  regard  to  the  results 
of  all  this  gazing  into  the  heavens,  and  measuring 

were  reviewing  the  line  on  their  return.  The  entry  is  in  Mason's  hand 
writing: — 

"  Nota  Bene:  From  any  eminence  in  the  line,  where  fifteen  or  twenty  miles 
of  the  visto  can  be  seen  (of  which  there  are  many),  the  said  line,  or  visto, 
very  apparently  shows  itself  to  form  a  parallel  of  latitude. 

"The  line  is  measured  horizontal;  the  hills  and  mountains,  with  a  16^-foot 
level ;  and  besides  the  mile  posts,  we  have  set  posts  in  the  true  line  marked 
W,  on  the  west  side,  all  along  the  line  opposite  the  stationary  points,  where 
the  sector  and  transit  instrument  stood.  The  said  posts  stand  in  the  middle 
of  the  visto,  which  is  about  eight  yards  wide." 

See  also  Philosophical  Transactions,  already  referred  to,  where  it  is  said 
that  this  visto  of  eight  yards  wide  was  "  seen  about  two  miles,  beautifully 
terminating  to  the  eye  in  a  point." 


36  THE   HISTORY   OF 

upon  the  earth,  and  to  have  become  restless  and  dis 
satisfied  ;  and,  on  the  25th  of  August,  the  surveyors 
note  that  "  Mr.  John  Green,  one  of  the  chiefs  of  the 
Mohawk  nation,  and  his  nephew,  leave  them,  in  order 
to  return  to  their  own  country."  The  roving  Indians 
of  the  wilderness,  regardless  of  the  escort,  begin  also 
to  give  the  party  of  white  men  uneasiness;  and  on 
the  29th  of  September,  twenty-six  of  the  assistants 
quit  the  work  for  fear  of  the  Shawnees  and  Delawares. 
Mason  and  Dixon  have  now  but  fifteen  axemen  left 
with  them;  but,  nothing  disheartened,  they  send 
back  to  Fort  Cumberland  for  aid,  and  push  forward 
with  the  line.  At  length,  they  reach  a  point,  two 
hundred  and  forty-four  miles  from  the  river  Dela 
ware,1  and  within  thirty-six  miles2  of  the  whole  dis 
tance  to  be  run.  And  here,  in  the  bottom  of  a  valley, 
on  the  borders  of  a  stream,  marked  Dunkard  Creek 
on  their  map,  they  come  to  an  Indian  war-path, 
winding  its  way  through  the  forest.  And  here,  their 
Indian  escort  tell  them,  that  it  is  the  will  of  the  Six 

1  The  exact  distance,  as  given  in  the  MS.  return  of  the  commissioners, 
preserved  at  Annapolis,  and  dated  Nov.  9,  1768,  is  244  miles,  38  chains,  and 
36  links  from  the  Delaware,  or  230  miles,  18  chains,  and  21  links  from  the 
place  of  beginning,  at  the  north-east  corner  of  Maryland. 

2  By  Col.  Graham's  report,  the  five  degrees  of  longitude  in  the  latitude  of 
the  boundary  line  would  make  the  southern  boundary  of  Pennsylvania  266 
miles,  24  chains,  and  80  links,  from  which,  deducting  the  distance  run — viz: 
230  miles,  18  chains,  and  21  links — and  we  have  36  miles,  6  chains,  and  59 
links  as  the  exact  distance  remaining  to  be  run  from  the  war-path,  west. — 
Graham,  p.  35. 


MASON   AND   DIXON'S   LINE.  37 

Nations  that  the  surveys  shall  be  stayed.  There  is 
no  alternative  but  obedience;  and,  retracing  their 
steps,  they  return  to  Philadelphia,  and,  reporting  all 
these  facts  to  the  commissioners  under  the  deed  of 
1760,  receive  an  honorable  discharge  on  the  26th  of 
December,  1767.  Subsequently,  and  by  other  hands, 
the  line  was  run  out  to  its  termination;  and  a  cairn 
of  stones,  some  five  feet  high,  in  the  dense  forest, 
now  marks  the  termination  of  Mason  and  Dixon's 
line,  calling  by  that  name  the  southern  boundary  of 
Pennsylvania;  and,  standing  on  the  cairn,  and  look 
ing  to  the  east  and  north,  a  fresher  growth  of  trees 
in  these  directions  indicates  the  ranges  of  the  vistas, 
so  often  mentioned.1  But  mount  the  highest  tree 
adjacent  to  the  cairn,  that  you  may  note  the  highest 
mountain  within  the  range  of  vision,  and  then, 
ascending  its  summit,  take  in  the  whole  horizon  at  a 
glance,  and  seek  for  a  single  home  of  a  single  de 
scendant  of  the  sylvan  monarchs,  whose  war-path 
limited  the  surveys,  and  you  will  seek  in  vain.  But 
go  back  to  the  cairn,  and  listen  there,  in  the  quiet  of 
the  woods,  and  &,  roll,  as  of  distant  thunder,  will 
come  unto  the  ear,  and  a  shrill  shriek  will  pierce  it, 
as  the  monster  and  the  miracle  of  modern  ingenuity 
— excluded  from  Pennsylvania  as  effectually,  by  the 
line  we  have  described,  as  the  surveyors  of  old  were 

1  From  the  verbal  statement  of  B.  H.  Latrobe,  Civil  Engineer.    The  corner 
is  not  far  from  the  Board  Tree  Tunnel,  on  the  Baltimore  and  Ohio  Railroad. 


38  THE   HISTORY   OF 

stayed  by  the  Indian  war-path — rushes  around  the 
south-western  angle  of  the  State,  on  its  way  from  the 
city  which  perpetuates  the  title  of  the  Lord  Proprie 
tary  of  Maryland,  to  find  a  breathing-place  on  the 
Ohio,  in  the  "  Pan-handle"  of  Virginia.1 

The  lines,  whose  history  has  thus  been  given,  were 
directed  to  be  marked  in  a  particular  manner,  both 
by  the  agreements  of  the  parties,  and  the  decree  of 
Lord  Hardwicke;  and  the  surveyors  accordingly 
planted,  at  the  end  of  every  fifth  mile,  a  stone, 
graven  with  the  arms  of  the  Penns  on  the  one  side, 
and  of  the  Baltimore  family  on  the  other,  marking 
the  intermediate  miles  with  smaller  stones,  having  a 
P  on  one  side,  and  an  M  on  the  other.  The  stones 
with  the  arms  were  all  sent  from  England.  This 
was  done  on  the  parallel  of  latitude  as  far  as  Side 
ling  Hill:  but  here,  all  wheel  transportation  ceasing 
in  1766,  the  further  marking  of  the  line  was  the 
vista  of  eight  yards  wide,  with  piles  of  stone  on  the 
crests  of  all  the  mountain  ranges,  built  some  eight 
feet  high,  as  far  as  the  summit  of  the  Allegheny, 

1  The  southern  boundary  of  Pennsylvania,  five  degrees  of  longitude,  was 
not  long  enough  to  take  the  line  to  the  Ohio,  and  its  western  boundary  being 
a  meridian,  and  the  course  of  the  Ohio,  upwards,  being  first,  gently,  and 
afterwards  abruptly,  inclining  to  the  east,  the  consequence  was,  that  a  nar 
row  strip  was  left  between  the  river  and  the  meridian,  belonging  to  Virginia, 
and  which  is  as  well  known  in  Virginia  as  "the  Pan-handle,"  as  the  capital 
of  the  State  is  known  as  Richmond — there  being  a  fancied  resemblance  in 
this  projection,  north  of  the  Pennsylvania  line,  to  the  handle  of  a  frying- 
pan,  looking  upon  the  body  of  the  State  as  the  basin,  or  bowl. 


MASON   AND   DIXON'S   LINE.  39 

beyond  which  the  line  was  marked  with  posts,  around 
which,  stones  and  earth  were  thrown,  the  better  to 
preserve  them.1 

The  map  of  the  line  was  not  completed  for  some 
time  after  the  field  work  terminated.  It  was  then 
engraved,  and  copies  were  distributed  among  the 
parties  interested.  The  Maryland  copy  I  have  seen. 
It  represents  the  line,  with  the  country  on  either 
side — the  width  of  the  engraving  being  about  an 
inch  and  a  half — beginning  at  Cape  Henlopen  and 
extending  to  the  Indian  war-path.  The  crossings  of 
streams,  mountain-ranges,  and  roads  are  carefully 
marked.  The  road-crossings  are  quite  numerous  on 
the  Peninsula :  beyond  the  Allegheny,  there  are  but 
two,  one  of  which  is  lettered  "  Braddock's  Road." 
Houses,  where  they  occur,  are  designated,  with  their 
distances  from  the  line,  and  are  not  unfrequent  as 
far  as  the  Susquehanna.  But  the  topographical, 
conventional  sign  for  forest,  and  thick  woods,  is, 

1  Proceedings  of  Commissioners,  MS.  in  Archives  at  Annapolis:  In  1768, 
the  Commissioners  had  the  stones,  that  had  been  planted,  examined,  and  sun 
dry  others  planted,  where  Mason  and  Dixon  had  omitted  to  do  so — and  there 
is  an  autograph  memorandum  of  S.  B.  Bordley,  Esq.,  dated  Sept.  10,  1768, 
at  Annapolis,  in  regard  to  the  stone  at  "  the  middle  point"  on  the  peninsular 
east  and  west  line,  stating,  that  it  had  been  dug  up  by  persons  engaged 
in  money-digging  I  the  belief  being  strong  that  the  buccaneers,  Kidd  and 
others,  had  landed  and  buried  treasures  on  the  shores  of  the  Chesapeake. 
No  doubt,  ignorant  persons,  knowing  nothing  of  the  survey,  had  supposed 
the  stone,  with  its  armorial  bearings,  to  be  a  mark  left  by  the  freebooters  to 
indicate  the  locality  of  their  treasxire. 


40  THE   HISTORY   OF 

after  all,  that  which  gives  character  to  the  general 
appearance  of  the  map. 

The  history  of  Mason  and  Dixon's  line  has  thus 
been  brought  to  a  close ;  and  before  parting  with 
those  whose  names  have  become  so  familiar,  it  would 
be  pleasant  to  add  some  information  in  regard  to 
their  individual  character  and  personal  appearance. 
But  the  most  careful  search  has  furnished  no  data  on 
these  points.  Their  letters  are  the  merest  business 
letters.  Their  journal  is  the  most  naked  of  records. 
The  only  thing  for  fancy,  even,  to  draw  inferences 
from,  is  their  handwriting,  and  I  confess  to  having 
studied  all  their  autographs,  in  the  hope  of  voicing 
them.  But  they  are  almost  as  silent  as  the  stars, 
whose  positions  they  were  employed,  night  after 
night,  in  noting.  Still,  they  are  not  wholly  dumb. 
Mason's  signature  is  a  remarkably  good  one — writ 
ten  slowly  and  carefully,  and  with  very  great  uni 
formity  in  its  size,  which  is  that  of  common,  full, 
running  hand.  The  Christian  name  is  abbreviated 
to  Cha:  with  a  colon  to  indicate  the  abbreviation; 
and  in  writing  the  surname,  a  dot  has  always  been 
patiently  made,  from  which  to  start  the  first  hair- 
stroke  of  the  M.  The  remaining  letters  are  written 
in  couples.  In  no  signature,  of  many  hundred,  has 
the  entire  surname  been  written  without  taking  the 
pen  twice  from  the  paper.  It  is  the  same,  whether 
recording  the  arrival  in  Philadelphia  from  England, 


FAC-SIMILES  OF  MASON  AND  DIXONS   SIGNATURES. 


•.3INCL*I»'S   LITH    PHI 


MASON   AND   DIXON'S   LINE.  41 

or  noting  the  desertion  of  a  majority  of  the  assist 
ants  for  fear  of  the  Indians.  I  infer,  from  these  small 
hints,  that  Mason  was  a  cool,  deliberate,  pains-taking 
man,  never  in  a  hurry;  a  man  of  quiet  courage,  who 
crossed  the  Monongahela  with  fifteen  men,  because 
it  was  his  duty  to  do  so,  though  he  would  have  much 
preferred  thrice  the  number  at  his  heels.  Dixon's 
signature  tells  a  different  story  somewhat.  He 
began  by  making  it  as  goodly,  nearly,  as  Mason's, 
and  of  about  the  same  size.  But  this  was  evidently 
an  effort.  All  he  seems  to  have  cared  to  do  was  to 
put  something  on  paper  that  would  indicate  his  pre 
sence.  At  times,  his  x  is  two  c's  placed  back  to 
back;  again,  it  is  the  roughest  cross.  Occasionally, 
his  signature  is  very  small;  again,  it  is  as  large  and 
sprawling  as  a  schoolboy's ;  from  all  which,  I  infer 
that  he  was  a  younger  man,  a  more  active  man,  a 
man  of  an  impatient  spirit  and  a  nervous  tempera 
ment,  just  such  a  man  as  worked  best  with  a  sober- 
sided  colleague. 

It  is  cheerfully  admitted  that  all  this  is  very  idle 
speculation;  and  the  only  excuse  for  its  introduction 
is  a  desire  to  vary,  in  some  small  degree,  the  dulness 
of  a  narrative,  affording  so  few  events  of  striking 
interest  as  that  we  are  engaged  in.1 

1  Besides  the  boundary  line,  run  as  described  in  the  text,  Mason  and  Dixon, 
under  instructions  from  the  Royal  Society,  availed  themselves  of  the  occasion 
to  determine  the  length  of  a  degree  of  latitude  in  the  Provinces  of  Pennsyl- 


42  THE   HISTORY   OF 

There  is  another  chapter,  however,  in  the  history 
of  this  celebrated  line.  In  the  course  of  time,  the 
stone  which  marked  the  north-east  corner  of  Mary 
land  was  undermined  by  a  brook,  and,  falling  down, 
was  removed  and  built  into  the  chimney  of  a  neigh 
boring  farm-house.1  "When  it  was  missed,  the  Le 
gislatures  of  the  States  of  Pennsylvania,  Maryland,2 
and  Delaware,  took  the  matter  in  hand,  and  a  joint 
commission  was  appointed,  which,  obtaining  the 
services  of  Lieutenant- Colonel  James  D.  Graham,  a 
distinguished  officer  of  Topographical  Engineers  of 
the  United  States,  caused  the  work  of  Mason  and 
Dixon  to  be  reviewed  as  far  as  was  necessary. 

To  this  end,  the  twelve  mile  radius  was  once  more 
measured;  the  tangent  point  and  point  of  intersec 
tion  were  re-located;  the  meridian  and  parallel  of  lati 
tude  were  run,  in  part,  so  as  to  find  their  intersec 
tion  ;  and  the  corner-stone  was  again  satisfactorily 
and  permanently  set.3 

vania  and  Maryland.  Their  proceedings  in  doing  -which  are  reported  at 
great  length,  and  in  the  minutest  detail,  in  the  Philosophical  Transactions,  and 
for  which  purpose  the  line,  from  the  middle  point  on  the  peninsular  line,  was 
made  use  of. 

Mason  died  in  Pennsylvania  in  February,  1787. — Encyclopedia  Americana. 
"Mason." 

Dixon  died  at  Durham,  England,  in  1777. — Lalande,  Bibliographic  Astro- 
nomique,  p.  50;  quoted  in  Biographic  Universelle,  "Mason,"  where  it  is  said, 
on  the  same  authority,  "  que  Dixon  etait  no  dans  un  mine  de  charbon." 

1  Graham's  Report,  p.  44. 

a  Resolution  of  December  Session,  1845.     No.  18. 

3  Graham's  Report,  p.  79,  et  seq. 


MASON   AND   DIXON?S   LINE.  43 

Colonel  Graham's  work  corroborated,  in  all  im 
portant  particulars,  the  work  of  his  predecessors. 
Some  errors  were  discovered,  however.  The  tangent 
point  had  been  placed  157.6  feet  too  far  to  the  north, 
and  the  point  of  intersection  143.7  feet  too  far  to  the 
south.  There  was  an  error,  also,  in  tracing  the  curve 
between  the  two  points,  the  correction  of  which  made 
the  State  of  Maryland  one  acre  and  eighty-seven 
hundredth  parts  of  an  acre  larger  than  Mason  and 
Dixon  left  the  province  of  the  same  name.1  The 

1  Among  errors,  indicated  by  Colonel  Graham,  is  one  in  the  latitude  of  the 
Observatory  on  Cedar  Street ;  though  this  can  hardly  be  called  an  error,  be 
cause  the  correction  is  due,  not  to  any  mistake  made  by  Mason  and  Dixon, 
but  to  a  truer  appreciation  of  the  exact  form  of  the  earth,  than  was  had  in 
their  day.  The  true  latitude  is  39°  56'  37". 4  N.,  or  8".  3  more  than  the  lati-  I 
tude  of  Mason  and  Dixon.  See  Graham's  Report,  p.  21,  in  nolis. 

One  of  the  results  of  Colonel  Graham's  survey  was  to  change  the  reputed 
citizenship  of  several  of  the  border  inhabitants.  "  Mr.  W.  Smith,"  says 
Colonel  Graham,  "a  gentleman  who  has  once  served  as  a  member  of  the  Le 
gislature  of  Delaware,  resided  a  full  half  mile  within  the  State  of  Pennsylva 
nia,  measured  in  the  shortest  direction  from  his  dwelling-house  to  the  circular 
boundary." — Graham's  Report,  p.  86. 

Christiana  Church,  too,  was  found  to  be  in  Pennsylvania. — Ibid. 

The  history  of  that  portion  of  the  curve  east  of  the  due  north  line,  is  not 
within  the  design  of  this  address.  Col.  Graham  states  that  it  was  unmarked, 
and  that  he  ran  about  3|  miles  of  it  for  the  convenience  of  the  neighbor 
ing  residents.  In  the  Journal  of  the  Franklin  Institute,  vol.  iv.  3d  series, 
p.  11  (1842),  is  a  paper  entitled,  "Mode  of  tracing  a  curve  of  a  very  large 
radius,  &c.,"  in  which  reference  is  made  to  field-notes  of  a  survey  completed 
in  1701,  under  a  warrant  from  William  Penn  to  Isaac  Tailer,  of  Chester 
County,  and  Thomas  Pierson,  of  Newcastle  County;  who,  in  the  presence  of 
Justices  of  each  county,  began  "at  the  end  of  the  Horse-Dike  next  the  town 
of  Newcastle,"  and  ran  due  north  twelve  miles  to  a  white  oak  marked  with 


44  THE   HISTORY   OF 

very  able  report  of  Colonel  Graham,  in  which  all 
these  matters  are  stated,  was  made  in  1850,  and  has 
been  referred  to,  frequently,  in  the  preparation  of  this 
address.  And  now,  the  Mason  and  Dixon's  line,  of 
common  parlance,  begins  at  a  "  triangular  prismatic 
post  of  granite,"  with  the  letters  M  D  and  P  on  the 
sides,  respectively,  facing  the  States  to  which  these 
letters  refer,  with  the  names  of  the  late  commis 
sioners,  Key,  Eyre,  and  Riddle,  and  the  date,  1849, 
cut  deep  on  the  north  side  under  the  letter  P.1  This 
stone  is  upon  land  belonging  to  William  Johnson,  in 
a  deep  ravine,  on  the  margin  of  a  small  brook  and 
near  its  source ;  and,  from  this  beginning,  the  line 
stretches  far  westward,  over  mountain  and  valley, 
flood  and  fell,  to  its  western  end,  the  cairn  of  stones 
in  the  forest. 

And  thus,  having  brought  our  narrative  down  from 
1629,  when  the  purchase  by  Godyn  furnished  the  re 
mote  cause  of  Mason  and  Dixon's  appointment,  to 
1850,  when  Colonel  Graham  made  his  report,  we 
have  arrived,  in  truth,  at  the  end  of  our  history :  but 
we  cannot  leave  the  subject  without  a  few  words, 
suggested  by  one  of  the  earliest  entries  in  Mason  and 
Dixon's  journal. 

It  is  there  recorded  that,  in  November,  1763,  they 

twelve  notches;  and  thence  traced  the  curve  eastward  to  the  river  Delaware, 
and  westward  far  enough  to  complete,  in  the  whole,  f  of  a  semicircle.     This 
line  is  stated  to  have  been  "well  marked  with  three  notches." 
1  Graham's  Report,  p.  84. 


MASON   AND   DIXON'S   LINE.  45 

employed  a  carpenter  to  build  an  observatory  at  the 
southern  part  of  the  city  of  Philadelphia.1  It  did 
not  take  long  to  erect  it,  for  we  soon  find  them  at 
work  there;  and  on  the  6th  of  January,  1764,  they 
determined  its  latitude  to  be  39°  56'  29".  1  north;  and 
this  was  their  first  astronomical  calculation  in  Ame 
rica  ;  and  humble  and  temporary  as  the  building  may 

1  The  Observatory  is  mentioned  in  the  following  letter,  which  affords  a 
fair  specimen  of  the  style  of  the  correspondence : — 

"Sm:  According  to  your  desire  mentioned  to  Mr.  Dixon,  at  Chestertown, 
we  have  compared  the  sums  of  money  paid  by  the  Right  Honble  Lord  Balti 
more,  and  the  Honorable  Thos :  and  Rlch'd  Penn,  Esqrs  (toward  dividing  the 
Provinces),  to  us  and  Mr.  McLane  since  our  arrival  in  America;  and  find  on 
the  whole  that  we  have  received  615  <£  more  of  the  Proprietors  of  Pensilva- 
nia  than  of  Lord  Baltimore. 

We  expect  you  will  please  to  send  6  or  700  £  that  Mr.  McLane  may  re 
ceive  it  at  Frederick  Town  (as  you  proposed)  the  24th  of  this  month,  we 
having  no  cash  to  proceed  with. 

We  are  Sp 

Your  most  obedient 

humble  servants, 

CHA:  MASON. 
JER.  DIXON. 
The  North  Mountain, 
April  14,  1766. 

P.  S.  Besides  the  above  balance,  the  Pennsylvania  Proprietors  have  paid 
for  erecting  the  Observatory  at  Philadelphia  &  carriage  to  Brandiwine, 
&c.  &c. 

To  T.  RIDOUT,  Esqr 

Secretary  to  His  Excellency 

Horatio  Sharpe,  Esq.  Governor 
of  Maryland  at 

Annapolis." 


46  THE   HISTORY   OF 

have  been  in  which  it  was  made,  it  was  the  first1  on 
the  continent  devoted  exclusively,  on  its  erection,  to 
the  purposes  of  astronomical  science.  From  the  lati 
tude,  thus  determined,  they  found  the  commencement 
of  the  parallel  to  which  they  were  to  give  their 
names;  and  in  1764,  they  began,  as  we  have  seen, 
their  slow  march  along  it,  just  ninety  years  ago,  not 
longer  than  a  man  may  live;  and  in  1765,  they 
climbed  the  summit  of  the  North  Mountain,  that 
they  might  judge  of  the  course  of  the  Potomac.  To 
the  eastward,  stretching  far  to  the  right  and  left,  were 
the  densely  wooded  slopes  of  the  Blue  Bidge,  scarred 
in  their  midst  by  the  naked  rocks  that  marked  the 
outlet  of  the  vast  lake  that  once  covered  what. is  now 
the  valley  of  Virginia,  and  which  had  shrunk,  as  its 
waters  rushed  to  the  ocean  through  the  gap,  into  the 
rivers  Potomac  and  Shenandoah.2  To  the  westward, 
parallel  ranges  of  mountains  extended  as  far  as  the 
eye  could  reach,  the  depressions  on  whose  crests  sug 
gested  the  places  where  the  Potomac  intersected 
them,  and  so  furnished  to  the  surveyors  some  rude 
notion  of  the  topography  of  the  region.  Indications 
of  civilized  man  were  rare  around,  and  the  most 

1  Bittenhouse's  Observatory  at  Norriton  was  commenced  Nov.  1768,  but 
not  completed  till  April,  1769. — Memoirs  of  Eittenhouse,  p.  165. 

Lalande,  in  his  Bibliographic  Astronomique,  treating  of  the  numerous  ob 
servatories  in  different  parts  of  the  world,  in  1792,  says:  " In  America,  I 
know  of  no  observatory  but  that  of  Mr.  Bittenhouse,  at  Philadelphia." 

2  See  Jefferson's  Notes  on  Virginia,  in  which  he  speculates  on  the  geology 
of  the  State  at  Harper's  Ferry,  p.  7. 


MASON   AND   DIXON'S   LINE.  47 

striking  of  these  was  the  fortress  among  the  hills, 
whose  gray  walls  of  solid  masonry  are  still  visible  on 
the  banks  of  the  river,  in  the  ruins  of  Fort  Frede 
rick.1  In  1767,  the  surveyors  had  reached  the  war 
path;  and,  as  at  the  Indian  bidding,  they  retraced 
their  steps,  and  looked  back  from  the  western  slope 
of  the  first  mountain  they  ascended  on  their  home 
ward  journey,  they  recognized  no  sign  of  civilization, 
and  knew  of  none  towards  which  their  labors  would 
have  led  them,  had  they  been  permitted  to  proceed. 
They,  probably,  were  not  imaginative  men,  and  it  is 
not  likely  that  they  indulged  in  many  reflections  as 
to  the  future  of  the  world  of  mountain  and  forest 
and  boundless  plains,  on  which  they  thus  turned  their 
backs,  on  their  way  to  their  observatory  in  Philadel 
phia.  But,  had  they  been  as  poetical  as  Darwin,  who 
anticipated  the  advent  of  steam  to 

"  Drag  the  slow  barge,  or  drive  the  rapid  car;" 

or,  as  prophetic  as  Bishop  Berkeley,  in  the  vision,  in 
which  he  exclaims, 

"  Westward  the  course  of  empire  takes  its  way — " 

it  is  not  probable  they  would  have  foreseen  that, 
when,  eighty-two  years  later,  their  work  came  to  be 

1  Erected  in  1756  by  Governor  Sharpe,  and  garrisoned  in  that  year  by 
Colonel  Dagworthy.  It  is  not  far  from  the  present  town  of  Hancock,  and  a 
prominent  object  to  the  traveller  on  the  railroad,  on  the  opposite  side  of  the 
Potomac,  after  passing  the  North  Mountain  in  Virginia,  going  west.  It  was 
a  frontier  fort,  to  protect  the  country  round  about  from  the  Indians. — 
McSherry's  History  of  Maryland,^.  139. 


48  THE   HISTORY   OF 

reviewed,  it  would  be  by  an  officer  of  the  army  of  a 
Republic  of  twenty- three  millions  of  inhabitants — a 
Eepublic  whose  rapid  development,  in  all  that  con 
stituted  the  true  greatness  of  a  people,  would  be  the 
wonder  of  the  world — a  Republic  whose  capital,  with 
its  stately  edifices,  would  be  reflected  in  the  waters 
of  the  river,  whose  devious  way  they  had  just  sought 
to  trace ;  and  which  would  number  among  its  marble 
piles,  an  observatory,  adding  new  planets  to  our 
system,  while  its  astronomers  and  mathematicians 
taught  man  the  order  of  the  winds,  that  they  might 
bear  him  more  certainly  across  the  sea.  Would 
they  have  foreseen  that,  not  here  alone,  in  the  capi 
tal,  would  the  skies  find  readers,  but  that  an  observa 
tory,  one  only  of  many  like  it  in  the  Republic,  would 
crown  the  summit  of  a  hill,  looking  down  on  a  great 
city1  near  three  hundred  miles  westward  of  the 
war-path  so  frequently  referred  to;  an  observatory, 
whose  corner-stone  would  be  laid  by  one  who  had 
been  the  President  of  the  Republic,  of  which  his 
father  had  been  the  President  before  him,  and  whose 
walls  would  arise  in  comeliness  and  strength,  to  in 
close  all  the  costly  appliances  which  science  and  art 
might  place  within  man's  reach  to  enable  him  to  ex 
plore  the  recesses  of  the  heavens.  As  poets  and 
dreamers  even,  such  imaginings  as  these  were,  in  all 
likelihood,  beyond  their  extremest  vision.  And  sup- 

1  The  Cincinnati  Observatory  is  here  referred  to,  whose  contributions  to 
astronomical  knowledge  are  so  highly  appreciated  in  the  scientific  world. 


MASON  AND   DIXON'S   LINE.  49 

pose  they  had  been  told  that  the  lightning,  which 
Franklin  had  then  but  recently  rendered  innocuous, 
was  to  become  man's  active,  daily,  and  domestic 
friend,  transmitting  his  thoughts,  visibly,  faster  than 
his  mind  could  think,  so  as  to  require  him  to  prepare, 
beforehand,  the  work  his  agent  was  to  do;  and  that, 
among  others  of  its  wondrous  performances,  it  would 
make  the  clock,  as  it  beat  its  seconds  in  the  western 
observatory,  impart  isochronism  to  other  clocks  be 
yond  the  mountains,  enabling,  at  the  same  time,  the 
watchers  of  the  stars  to  whisper,  in  the  silence  of  the 
night,  their  discoveries  to  comrade  gazers  a  thousand 
miles  away.  Had  such  things  as  these  been  told  to 
Mason  and  his  colleague,  they  might  well  have  sup 
posed  themselves  in  a  madman's  company,  or  listen 
ing  to  the  thousand  and  second  tale  of  Scheherezade. 
And  yet,  the  incredible  of  1767  is  the  schoolboy's 
learning  of  to-day.  Equally  startled  would  they  have 
been,  could  the  story  of  the  Revolution,  then  so  near 
at  hand,  have  been  foretold  to  these  servants  of  the 
Lord  Proprietary  of  Maryland  and  the  Proprietors  of 
Pennsylvania,  who  never  spoke  of  their  immediate 
superiors  in  office  except  as  "  the  gentlemen  commis 
sioners,"  and  in  the  deferential  and  obsequious  spirit 
that  was  so  soon  to  disappear.1  But  more  astonished 

1  The  following  is  from  the  field-notes  of  Mason  and  Dixon,  1766  : — 

"  Mar.  15 :  C.  Mason  left  Annapolis,  and  proceeded  for  the  North  Mountain, 

to  continue  the  line.     J.  Dixon  left  Philadelphia  to  attend  the  gentlemen 

commissioners  at  Chester  Town." 

7 


50  THE   HISTORY   OF 

still  can  we  imagine  them,  could  they  have  been  told, 
that  the  results  of  this  revolution  having  been  power, 
and  might,  and  majesty,  and  boundless  prosperity,  of 
which  every  individual  in  the  land  was  a  participant, 
the  line  they  ran  would  grow  into  consequence,  and 
be  regarded  with  dread,  as  fierce  intemperate  men, 
with  small  pride  in  the  past,  and  less  care  for  the 
future,  spoke  of  it  as  a  line  to  be  studded  with  for 
tresses  from  end  to  end,  on  opposite  sides  of  which 
hostile  nations  would  be  arrayed  in  arms.  But  if, 
with  the  license  of  the  occasion,  we  may  suppose 
such  things  to  have  been  suggested  to  them,  we  can, 
at  the  same  time,  imagine  their  reply,  and  we  can 
almost  hear  them  saying:  "  These  uses,  to  which  you 
put  the  lightning;  this  erection  of  cities  on  river 
shores,  in  Indian  lands ;  this  tale  of  battle,  and  blood 
shed,  and  victory ;  this  dethroning  of  monarch s  and 
uplifting  of  their  subjects,  are  astounding  results 
that  we  cannot  appreciate,  for  we  see  no  elements  to 
produce  them,  and  they  shock  all  the  prejudices  of 
our  education.  To  time  we  leave  their  development. 
But,  that  a  people  blessed  beyond  all  others,  in  their 
realization,  if  realized  they  are  to  be,  and  occupying 
the  proudest  place  among  the  nations,  because  of 
their  wondrous  unity,  under  a  government  that  ex 
tent  of  dominion  enfeebles  not — should  willingly  per 
mit  their  Union  to  be  dissolved,  we  cannot  believe ; 
because,  here,  we  are  dealing,  not  with  the  future  of 
science  or  politics,  but  with  the  principles  of  hu- 


MASON   AND   DIXON'S   LINE.  51 

manity  common  to  all  ages;  and,  depend  upon  it, 
whatever  the  few  may  wish,  the  many  will  be  true ; 
and  this,  our  line  of  survey,  will,  after  all,  owe  its 
notoriety  to  ephemeral  oratory,  in  which  it  figures  as 
a  mere  phrase  of  cant,  or  to  addresses,  which  will 
bring  to  light  the  few  brief  records  we  have  left  of 
our  transactions."  And  these,  the  words  which  we 
have  put  into  the  mouths  of  Mason  and  Dixon,  for 
the  sake  of  the  unity  of  our  discourse,  we  doubt  not, 
will  be  words  of  prophecy,  as  regards  the  destiny  of 
our  country;  and  that  time,  which  has  developed  the 
excitement  that  has  given  prominence  to  the  line  in 
question,  will  furnish,  in  due  season,  the  solution  of 
present  difficulties;  and  that,  while  the  Mason  and 
Dixon's  line  of  geography  will  continue  to  be  that 
whose  heraldic  insignia  are  still  to  be  found  in  field 
and  forest,  the  Mason  and  Dixon's  line  of  politics 
will  gradually  change  its  position  until,  as  cloud- 
shadows  pass,  leaving  earth  in  sunlight,  we  shall  be 
seen,  of  all,  to  be  a  united  and  homogeneous  people,1 

1  For  the  causes,  and  their  operation,  to  which  this  result  will  be  attribu 
table,  see  the  note  to  page  6.  They  are  more  particularly  described  in  the 
following  extract  from  a  speech  of  the  author  on  another  occasion,  and 
which  is  quoted  here,  not  for  the  purpose  of  invoking  the  official  capacity 
in  which  it  was  delivered  as  authority,  but  that  the  suggestion  of  the  text 
may  be  more  fully  understood,  without  introducing  matter  not  germain  to  the 
scope  of  the  address  into  the  text  itself: — 

"African  colonization  offers,  in  its  settlements  on  the  coast  of  Africa,  the 
only  solution  of  the  difficult  question  presented  by  the  existence,  in  the  snmc 
land,  of  two  free  races  between  whom  amalgamation  by  intermarriage  is  im- 


52    HISTORY   OF   MASON   AND   DIXON'S   LINE. 

not  in  this  generation,  or  the  next,  or  the  next,  but 
still,  at  an  early  day,  looking  to  what  we  believe, 
under  God,  will  be  the  duration  of  the  Republic. 

practicable ;  and  it  opens  an  outlet,  better  than  any  other,  through  which  the 
weaker  of  the  two  may  escape  from  the  pressure  of  that  vast  European  im 
migration,  which  threatens  to  crush  it  in  a  strife  for  bread — an  immigration 
withheld  in  mercy  until  new  homes  in  another  continent  could  be  prepared 
for  those  who  were  to  disappear  before  it. 

"There  are  some  who  believe  that  this  immigration,  together  with  the 
natural  increase  of  our  population,  may,  one  day,  so  affect  wages  as  to  make 
it  questionable,  whether  free  white  labor,  becoming  by  that  time  acclimated 
to  the  toil  of  every  part  of  our  country,  may  not  be  cheaper,  under  all  cir 
cumstances,  than  slave  labor ;  in  which  event,  it  is  supposed  that  a  volun 
tary  emancipation,  prompted  by  interest  alone,  may  make  our  whole  colored 
population  free.  Should  such  anticipations  ever  be  realized,  the  import 
ance  of  the  outlet  which  colonization  has  opened  in  the  direction  of  Liberia, 
will  be  all  the  more  highly  appreciated;  and  should  slavery,  from  mere 
lack  of  other  topics  for  that  party  excitement  which  is  a  necessity,  it  would 
seem,  of  our  condition,  still  continue  to  be  discussed,  eagerly  and  angrily,  in 
high  places,  the  discussion  will,  at  all  events,  be  made  harmless,  by  the  gra 
dual  withdrawal  of  the  colored  race,  of  their  own  accord,  from  the  theatre  of 
the  strife." — Thirty- Seventh  Annual  Report  of  the  American  Colonization  Society, 
p.  26.  January  7,  1854. 


— 


IOAN  DEPT. 


1166  -2  PM 
JAN  19  '66 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 


